Award-Winning MHI Retailer Regarding HUD Objectives, Pam Danner, Needed Changes

March 8th, 2017 No comments

I can’t improve on what Mark Weiss [MHARR President and CEO] has indicated below:

DougGormanICantImproveOnWhatMarkWeissMHARRPresidentCEOHasSaidBelowManufacturedHousingIndustryVoices-MHProNews

Graphic above and the headline were provided by MHProNews, as is customary in publishing. The words in [brackets] were added for clarity, and the text submitted for publication is by the author, Doug Gorman. 

“While MHARR does not claim to speak for the entire industry, we have made it clear that after years of abuse by federal regulators acting contrary to the law and empowering entrenched revenue-driven contractors to target the industry, the new era of regulatory deconstruction being ushered-in by the Trump Administration offers a profound opportunity that must not be missed or squandered.  And while other segments of the industry – following their recent meeting – have not given any public indication of a change in course, direction or approach based on this new reality, MHARR has been on top of this critical matter since the November election, and has already put in place fundamental priorities and policies that I am happy to share with you and the rest of the industry as shown below:

  1. Elevate and include manufactured housing in all HUD (and other federal) housing and housing finance programs on the same terms as other types of housing;
  1. Immediately re-assign the current career HUD manufactured housing program administrator and appoint an appropriately-qualified non-career administrator in accordance with the 2000 reform law who would fully and properly implement that law and any and all regulatory policies and orders put in place by President Trump;
  1. Immediately prepare and issue a new Request for Proposals (RFP) for the HUD program monitoring contract which would provide for, encourage, and ensure full and fair competition for that position, eliminate all “make-work” programs and functions contained in the current contract consistent with Trump Administration regulatory policies and orders, and terminate the existing monitoring contract upon the identification and selection of a new contractor;
  1. Seek the immediate withdrawal of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposed manufactured housing energy rule pursuant to executive action by either the incoming DOE Secretary, the President, or other appropriate authority and, if necessary, seek a congressional resolution pursuant to the Congressional Review Act to reject any such rule if or when finalized; and
  1. Demand and ensure securitization and secondary market support for manufactured home chattel loans in a significant and timely manner by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so that consumers are not needlessly either excluded from the housing market or unnecessarily forced into higher-cost loans within a less-than-fully-competitive consumer financing market.” ##

Addendum on 1:40 PM 3.10.2017, by Doug Gorman:

I would clarify that Mark Weiss’s language re Pam Danner was that she be reassigned. The original structure of the 21 member Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee  (MHCC) was to have a nonvoting 22nd member. That position was to be a non-career political appointee who would change most likely with each administration. That was the position that Bill Matchneer filled originally as a political appointee reporting to Gary Cunningham at one point. When Gary Cunningham left HUD Bill was promoted to Gary’s career position and the non-career position has never been filled since. Mark’s point was that HUD should structure the manufactured housing program as intended by the 2000 statute. ###

DougGormanHomeMartTulsaOKCreditManufacturedHousingIndustryVoicesCommentaryMHProNews125x125Industry Voices post submitted by Doug Gorman, Home-Mart, Tulsa, OK.  Other guest comments on this or other topics of general industry interest are encouraged and welcome.

 

 

 

(Editor’s Note 1:  Doug Gorman has won several MHI awards as a retailer, and was volunteered hundreds of hours on national issues, served on the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC), etc. Gorman is one of a few individuals who was asked by MHProNews for his thoughts on the needs to replace Pam Danner at HUD, and what MHI’s position on this issue ought to be.  The above was sent by Gorman in response to that inquiry, and was sent for publication.

Editor’s Note 2: There are several Industry Voices posts pending publication, we hope to get caught up in the next week or so.  Please continue to send your thoughts and comments – on or off the record – and be clear what is and is not for attributed publication.  Thank you for your patience.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

UMH Properties’ Sam Landy Reacts to Call to Defund National Public Radio (NPR)

February 18th, 2017 No comments

NPR and UMH both care deeply about people.

UMH has operated manufactured home communities since 1969. We believe enforcement of our rules and regulations is best for the majority of the people who live in our community.

NPR is reminding us that we must exercise our authority with compassion. We welcome outside oversight and criticism as it allows us to objectively evaluate our actions.

As with many op-ed or letters to the editor, the headline and graphics are provided by the publisher, but the thoughts and words published are those of the writer. Other Industry Voices perspectives are welcomed on this or other relevant topics.

We believe in each case covered here, we in fact did the right thing for our residents. and that we did it in a compassionate manner.

We welcome NPR’s follow up.

samlandy-umh-ceopresidentjd_credit-linkedi-posted-industryvoicesmanufacturedhousingindustrypronews-mhpronewsSam Landy, JD
President and CEO
UMH Properties

(Editor’s notes: Mr. Landy’s Industry Voices guest comment came in response to the commentary on the Daily Signal, linked here, calling for NPR to be defunded.  Landy was cited in the article, linked below.

NPR and Fair Housing: Is “Liberal Bias” Creating Fake News?

For the interview, A Cup of Coffee withSam Landy, click here.)

Call to Defund NPR draws Manufactured Home Community Owner Richard Nodel, Nodel Parks, Reaction

February 18th, 2017 No comments

Negative coverage of our industry is something many media outlets are guilty of, but I am a patriot first.

Anything that is an abridgment of our constitutional rights is a greater threat to all of us than just a negative news article.

Let’s fight bad information with good information, and not have to resort to unAmerican activities like censorship of the media.

Just because we don’t like the report, do we try and shutter the source? ##

RichardNodel-owner-NodelParks-manufacturedhomecommunities-posted-IndustryVoices-manufacturedhousingindustrynewsMHProNews-com-150x218Richard Nodel
Nodel Parks

(Editor’s note: Richard Nodel’s Industry Voices guest comment came in response to the commentary on the Daily Signal, linked here, calling for NPR to be defunded.  Landy was cited in the article, linked below.

NPR and Fair Housing: Is “Liberal Bias” Creating Fake News?)

AnythingAbridgementConstitutionalRightsGreaterThreatThanNegativeNewsArticleFightBadInfowithGoodInformationRichardNodelIndustryVoicesNodelParksMHProNews

The headline and this text graphic are provided by the editor, as is common with most publications. The comments are those of the writer, Richard Nodel.  Other thoughtful comments by Industry Voices on this or other topics of professional interest are encouraged.

Manufactured Housing Millennial Sounds off on Industry Opportunity

February 18th, 2017 No comments

As conventional housing prices and mortgage rates continue to rise, the Millennial generation and others are looking for smart options. Many desire to move from renting to owning, but often struggle to find that a real possibility in the current site built market. The manufactured housing industry can offer a solution to that problem.

Today’s manufactured homes can look and live like a conventional, site built house, and can be half the price of new construction. Additionally, many manufactured homes are Energy Star rated, so they are more efficient than older existing homes.

BenefitsManufacturedHomeMillennialLindseyBostickSunshineHomesRedBayALPostedManufacturedHomeIndustryVoicesMHProNews

Headline and this text graphic are provided by the editor, as is common with most publications. The comments are those of the writer, Lindsey Bostick.

Energy consumption is an important factor to many people today, especially the Millennial generation. I know the benefits of purchasing a manufactured home because, as a millennial myself, I live in a residential style manufactured home that I purchased last year.  ##

LindseyBostick-SunshineHomesManufacturedHousingIndustryDailyBusinessNewsMHProNews

Lindsey Bostick
Sunshine Homes
(Editor’s Notes: Lindsey Bostick’s comments are in relation to reports, such as the ones linked here and here.

For the interview, A Cup of Coffee with…Lindsey Bostick, Sunshine Homes, click here.)

DÉJÀ VU AGAIN? A New Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) Initiative

February 16th, 2017 No comments

A New Study

I like to say to myself “If you live long enough, you’ll see it all.”  I have now lived long enough to see a second MHI effort to do “major consumer research” to “profile the housing needs and opportunities for the industry among various underserved homebuyers.” Who can forget the first effort?

Jeepers, I have no heart burn with the stated goal and direction of this initiative.  I think it possibly worthwhile, furthermore, we already have experience along this trail.  In the early 2000’s Drucker Worldwide, who is conducting the current study, was replaced by Roper International, in the first effort.  If the stated goals at that time were somewhat different, what was not different was the goal of gathering information by a consulting firm, Roper, create a report, then present a possible campaign to increase manufactured housing sales.  Sounds good, right?”

The Roper study was to be the linchpin for an industry image campaign.  Surely that was badly needed at that time, and still is.  What remains to be seen is whether the course of this initiative ends differently than the Roper effort, which ended badly.

Timetable

According to the study timetable set forth by Dick Jennison, MHI President, it will be a multi-step process; the study first, then present the research results to the members of MHI to determine “its next step is late-summer” (2017).  I must say that all sounds logical, practical and well-conceived, and very Roper-ish.  So far, OK.

RoperReportDruckerWorldWideMartyLavinManufacturedHousingInstituteMHStudy-PostedManufacturedHomeIndustryVoicesMHProNews628x230

As with all Industry Voices, letters to the editor, and op-ed posted commentary, the writer has provided their own text, while we as publisher created this particular image graphic, using the writer’s words and photo.  Differing viewpoints on this or other industry issues are welcomed.

For those of you out of swaddling clothes by the year 2000, the new study must send a chill down your spine and some involved in the Roper study, like me, might say a few more things.  There might even be a question or two.

Again??

First of all, quoting Yogi, this all seems like déjà vu all over again.  Others might say, we sure had a fun time the last time we did a study but will the result be different this time?  Some skeptics might ask, what has changed so much in the 10-12 years since the Roper study was concluded?  Finally, is the initiative once again the springboard to the fabled “Industry Image Campaign,” or headed to something else?  One wonders.

In view of the history on this thing, it is logical to be skeptical of the entire process.

I was very much involved in the Roper effort, which died an ignoble death, dealt a crushing blow to the industry (from which it hasn’t recovered), supposedly couldn’t be afforded financially then, and the industry condition seems even weaker now.

I would question, what is the goal of the initiative in terms of advancing the stated aim?  After all, when you find out from the public that the MH industry is the least liked industry Roper ever studied, where do you go from there?  And, what has changed since Roper reported these facts to MHI membership?

  • Have fewer communities closed since Roper, putting their residents on the street?
  • Have rent increases in communities been muted?
  • Has financing the home purchase become easier since Roper time?
  • Have loan interest rates decreased substantially on new MH home purchases?
  • Does the news media paint any glowing MH articles other than the standard “man have you seen those new trailers lately? They are gorgeous!”  I’ve been observing that one since 1972, with little positive response form the buying public, except during periods of loose/defective retail financing.  Too many sure went wild with that one.

Remind the swaddling-clothes-set that the last industry top in 1998, which saw 373,000 HUD Code homes emerge from our factories, led to the present incapacitated condition of the industry.  Heavy defaults erupted thereafter, leading to the disastrous industry meltdown which saw many portfolios lose all value.

It wasn’t covered in “The Big Short,” but bankers/lenders and government regulators paid scant attention to the MH debacle which could easily have predicted the lender use of the MH lending style on site-built single family homes was likely to create the same result as that which occurred with those highly distressed HUD Code portfolios. Oh, mama!

Yes, the results were similar in site-built mortgages, EXCEPT, that lending there is so much greater in volume that the only similarity was in the results.

MH Ugly and No Apology

Repossessed homes, financial distress, broken families, children leaving their familiar school, moving in with relatives or to a homeless shelter, loss of home, and huge, and I mean huge lender/investor/government losses.  No one paid attention to the MH meltdown, and too little was learned little from it. And no one apologized.

MHI has a mission to assist the MH industry to prosper.  Growth is certainly a key component of that mission, and if we are in a slight upward hump in sales now, in comparison to our pre-1998 performance, we are but a shadow of our former selves, down by 75% or so.

So why am I bothering to write this piece when my MH activity today is almost exclusively as an expert witness for law suits?  I’m asking myself the same.  But, I greatly fear we are in a glide path to Roperville II, the study-hard, but no-action paradigm of the last effort and various other MHI efforts.

Again, note that all the Task Force initiative participants, save two, are from homebuilders, again similar to the Roper event.  After all, having spent the money on the Roper study, when it came time to pony up the $17.00 to be added to each home section’s invoice built at that time, there was no buy-in from the builders.  To this day I wonder how the builders thought MHI was going to fund any image campaign if most of the money was not coming from a fee added to each home section’s invoice.

And so when the builders didn’t bite, or at least most of the important ones didn’t, the entire Roper effort fell flat on its face.  Great and expensive dog food, but when put down, no dogs ate it.

My Roper stuff went into hibernation in my stand alone hard drive, and there it sits, lonely, still wondering whether it could have done for us what the RV guys and gals accomplished with their GoRVing image campaign.  During the Roper initiative, we had a large joint meeting with the RVers, and they recommended we move forward in the quickest term, with our image campaign.  The RVers all said they’d be on their asses had they not moved forward.  As an industry, we are a little thin on accepting good advice.

Right Course/Wrong Course

In my mind, MHI, for which I worked very hard for 20 years to advance industry healthy, seems under attack lately.  Further, they continue to posit that the health and growth of the industry lies primarily in hat-in-hand visits to various government divisions.  The Duty to Serve/GSE initiate seems for the moment the Holy Grail for the industry.  A great deal of time and effort has been directed there.  At least the current Drucker Study is away from that direction, and for that I think it makes sense on some level.

Parenthetically, I might suggest MHI spend a great deal more time and effort in pushing the Section 8 program to help individuals to buy their HUDs.  I have believed this for years, ever since a very highly placed GSE person said at one of my industry meetings, “The industry needs to find a way to help so many of your financially fragile clients buy their MH with government help.”  After all, why pay Section 8 to rent a rat crap apartment, when instead these same folks could buy their shiny, new MH with Section 8 help.  How much better than an apartment rental is that?  A lot.

Task Force

Some industry builders in the Drucker Study are people known to me.  I like them and they are intelligent folks.  But, one concept that emerged from Roper is a deep seated belief in the industry that you don’t do anything to help your competition, even if it might help you.  And it was obvious in the Roper effort that the “don’t help competition” was alive and well in the final decision to let Roper die peacefully. And some held that adding even an extra dollar to the invoice could destroy the industry!

I strongly suggest that as this effort proceeds forward, if it does, MHI determine two things quickly:

  1. Are builders willing to take important actions to help the industry as a whole even if their competitors will benefit?
  2. How will this be financed and paid for should it move forward?

I know Mr. Jennison wants to show the MHI membership he is taking bold moves to help the industry, especially as he seems somewhat under attack recently.  But the last time the Roper Study cost some $250,000.00, or thereabouts.  Money the industry didn’t have.  How much will be spent now, and where is it coming from?

I want to avoid seeming negative on this whole Drucker thing, but that is the problem with old age.  When young and I saw a ball bearing rolling across a table I wondered whether it would hit the ceiling, walls or floor.  I didn’t know then.  Well, the ball bearing always hits the floor, I know that now.

Please, please

A final plea to MHI. The Roper initiative saw a final meeting where Roper presented some thoughts on the direction of the proposed media campaign, with actual T.V. ads.  This is what Roper did for a living.  Not infallible, but still they are the experts.

The meeting descended into enumerable people complaining loudly about the projected ads. They had far better ideas!  Individuals who spent lots of time widening their asses seated in lender’s chairs and others who spent their days walking dusty lots in white shoes and gold chains at sales locations suddenly became Doyle Dane and Bernbach, the international advertising network.

Please, please, if you get to the point that some sort of campaign is warranted to move forward, do not allow a room of 200 people screaming at the proposal.  Keep it in a tight group, such as the task force.  Let them make the decision.  Democracy is not a good application to this process.  It needs benevolent dictators. ##

marty-lavin-posted-on-mhpronewsBy Marty Lavin, JD.
350 Main Street
BURLINGTON, VT 05401
att’y, consultant, & expert witness
only in factory built housing
 

 

Industry Should Stay the Course in Duty to Serve Efforts

February 10th, 2017 1 comment

I appreciate the way that MHAAR respectfully criticized my commentary on the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s (FHFA’s) final rule to implement the “Duty to Serve” (DTS) requirements as being “far too charitable,” but the criticism was misdirected.  My comments neither praised nor denigrated the FHFA for the DTS final rule.

I learned early in my career that you play the hand that you’re dealt.  Sometimes you’re in a strong position and other times you’re not.  The situation dictates your actions and response.

With respect to DTS, the industry was not dealt a strong hand, but I am proud of the way the industry responded.  Because of that, the industry is closer today than at any time in recent years to getting a pilot program for chattel manufactured home loans through the Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The FHFA made up its mind a long time ago that it didn’t have the legal authority to require the GSEs to create a secondary market program for chattel manufactured home loans.  Whether this is true or not doesn’t make a difference for all intents and purposes.

JimAyotteFMHAManufacturedHousingIndustryVoicesDutyToServeGSEFHFA-MHProNews

I agree with MHAAR that “If Congress had meant the “Duty to Serve” to be optional, it would not have called it a “Duty.”

But anyone involved with laws and regulations for any length of time understands that laws are not always black and white.  In fact, many times they are not.

For arguments sake, let’s say that the law specifically requires the GSEs to create a loan program for chattel manufactured homes.  Where does that get us? The industry could spend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars and years litigating this point.  Even if the industry prevailed, the GSEs would still be in the driver’s seat.  They could create a program that satisfies the legal requirements, but is so safe and sound that it is impractical and unusable.

The only way for the industry to get the GSEs to create a secondary market program for chattel manufactured home loans is to convince them that it is good business and the right thing to do.

This requires a different approach than continually chastising the FHFA for not mandating the GSEs to create a secondary market program for chattel.

MHARR does an excellent job as the industry’s conscience.  MHARR serves an important role in forcefully and articulately weighing-in on every proposal that adversely affects the industry.  But, this is only one element of a strategy, not the whole strategy.  In this situation, a different approach is needed and that approach is to continue doing what we’re doing.

We were all disappointed that it took nine years from the date of enactment of the DTS legislation to get a proposed rule and we were even more disappointed when the proposed rule did not provide “Duty to Serve” credit for chattel loans.  The silver lining was that it was a catalyst for industry members to submit over 3,100 comment letters to the FHFA.  Those letters certainly got the attention of the FHFA and the GSEs.

As a follow-up, the FHFA held an unprecedented public hearing last April to receive input from the industry on how to structure a successful chattel loan program.  The hearing was not to hear testimony on why a chattel program was needed, that fact was already established from the volume of public comments submitted.

The industry’s efforts resulted in a final rule that opened the door a crack by providing the GSEs “Duty to Serve” credit for purchasing manufactured housing loans, but not mandating that they do so.  Considering where we started from in December 2015, the final rule shows the positive impact that an industry can have when its members are engaged and energized.

The FHFA scheduled three “listening sessions” in January and February of this year to take additional testimony from industry stakeholders. This indicates that the FHFA and the GSEs have an interest in exploring the possibility of creating a secondary market for chattel manufactured home loans.

The most important development over the past thirteen months has been the GSEs meeting with industry stakeholders. The meetings started last spring and are continuing today.

The GSEs have shown a genuine interest in understanding today’s chattel housing market. Industry representatives have made a concerted effort to educate the GSEs about chattel manufactured homes and available loan products, and to understand the GSEs concerns, offer suggestions and convey a willingness to be open to new requirements.

From where I sit, all parties are working hard to try to develop a pilot program for chattel manufactured home loans.  I am optimistic that it will become a reality if we continue doing exactly what we’re doing.  ##

jimayottefloridamanufacturedhousingassociationfmha-industryvoices-manufacturedhousingindustrycommentary-mhpronewsJames R. Ayotte, CAE
Executive Director
Florida Manufactured Housing Association
1284 Timberlane Road
Tallahassee, FL  32312

The Manufactured Housing Revolution – Ted Gross, Continental Communities

February 10th, 2017 No comments

Tony, It was nice to see you at the 2017 Louisville home show last week!  I just wanted to drop you a line about your book, “The Manufactured Housing Revolution.

Continental Communities purchased 15 copies for our managers last year to review and get some ideas for sales in their communities.  We found “A Journey in Successful Marketing” and “Twelve Things Every Sales Super Star Knows” extremely helpful for our sales staff.

Great articles in the entire book!  We are on our way to increased sales!

I hope you’re a back next year at the 2018 Louisville Home Show running a few of your informative seminars again!

Thanks for everything!

Ted Gross

TedGrossOperationsManagerContinentalCommunitiesCreditMHProNews100x100Theodore M. Gross
Operations Manager
Continental Communities, LLC
2015 Spring Road, Suite 600
Oak Brook, Illinois 60523

(Editor’s Notes: the headline was supplied by MHProNews, but the rest of this message for publication is by Ted Gross. He has been a follower and advocate for MHProNews, MHLivingNews and the education efforts of our platforms and services for several years, see this prior article by Ted, and a video interview as examples.  The graphics and links on this page are provided by the publisher.)

TedGrossBookReviewManufacturedHousingRevolutionByLATonyKovach-postedIndustryVoicesMHProNews

MHARR’s Mark Weiss Reaction to Jim Ayotte’s GSE’s Duty to Serve Commentary

January 24th, 2017 No comments

We at MHARR have the greatest respect for Jim Ayotte, but his recent commentary on the final Duty to Serve (DTS) rule issued by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) is far too charitable.

It’s one thing to see the proverbial glass as half full versus half empty.  It’s another to accept a few droplets as half a glass.

And that is what consumers and the industry have gotten from FHFA – a few drops at the bottom of the glass, window dressing that is not likely to lead anywhere soon, despite the urgent need now for affordable and competitive chattel-based consumer financing for manufactured homes.

If Congress had meant the “duty to serve” to be optional, it would not have called it a “duty.”  The dictionary definition of a “duty” has – at its core – a mandatory responsibility.  And Congress is presumed to use words according to their ordinary and customary meaning. But nothing in the FHFA rule would require Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to do anything to support MH chattel loans – not even a “pilot program” (more about that in a moment).  So the “duty” instituted by FHFA is not really a “duty” at all, but a choice left to entities that have steadfastly refused to provide secondary market support for MH chattel loans – which prompted the “duty to serve” in the first place.

DutyToServeManufacturedHousingMMarkWeissJDPresidentMHARR-MHProNews-

If all this sounds familiar, it should. It mimics HUD’s “interpretation” of its statutory “responsibility” to appoint a non-career administrator for the federal manufactured housing program as “not mandatory” even though Webster’s says it is.  But HUD (and maybe now FHFA) has gotten away with it because much of the industry plays along.

It’s hard to see, then, how a non-duty which leaves Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac free to ignore the 80% of the manufactured housing market represented by chattel placements (not 70% as reported elsewhere) lives up to the directive of Congress.

While it’s true that FHFA’s final rule leaves the door open just a crack for chattel, rather than slamming it shut as it did in its proposed rules, what does this really do for consumers and an industry that needs competitively-priced and readily-available chattel financing in order to reach its full potential?

DTS was enacted by Congress nine years ago. If either FHFA or the Enterprises were really interested in MH chattel financing, there has been plenty of time to do the groundwork and obtain the necessary loan performance information.  There has even been time for a “pilot program” or two over the last decade.  No, instead, we’re supposed to take it slow, with a non-duty “duty,” while consumers are needlessly herded into higher-cost loans, paying more than they would in a truly competitive financing market not distorted by official discrimination that would be unacceptable in any other context.

With nine years already gone, how much longer will consumers have to wait for the industry to demand full financing parity with other types of housing?  Washington, D.C. is traditionally a graveyard for all kinds of “pilot programs” started with the best of intentions.  Given a “duty” by Congress, the burden is not – and should not – be on the industry and consumers to prove their worthiness. The burden should be on FHFA and the Enterprises to show why they are not complying with the will and word of Congress now. ##

MMarkWeissCEO-MHARR-ManufacturedHousingAssociationforRegulatoryReform-posted-IndustryVoices-MHProNews

By M. Mark Weiss, JD.
President and CEO of the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR).

(The graphic above and the headline are provided by the editor, as is customary with many publishers. The content expresses the views of the writer.)

Tim Williams Encouraged by Regulatory Freeze Ordered by President Trump

January 23rd, 2017 No comments

I am deeply encouraged that less than 24 hours into President Trump’s term, he has frozen new, potentially burdensome regulations.

The immediate impact assists working people and those on fixed incomes – as well as others of low and moderate income – to realize the dream of affordable manufactured homeownership and cannot be overstated.

Onerous regulations were in the process of adoption by the previous administration that would have added thousands of dollars to the cost of manufactured homes, thus pricing tens of thousands of Americans from realizing the dream of homeownership.

Those regulations range from excessive energy mandates, to overkill foundation rules, as well as needless additional regulation of home construction.

TimWilliamsOnTrumpFreezeofRegulationsPostedIndustryVoicesMHProNews

Image credit, MHProNews. The headline and image are provided by the editor.

Manufactured homes are the ONLY form of housing where each home is rigorously inspected and approved by government in the design, construction, and home placement process.

The strong existing consumer protections will continue without the regulatory over kill which would have stifled expanded homeownership and cost thousands of construction jobs. ##

tim-williams-ohio-manufactured-home-association-mhpronews

Tim Williams, OMHA.

Tim Williams
Executive Director
Ohio Manufactured Homes Association (OMHA)
244 Bradenton Avenue
Dublin, Ohio 43017

NPR’s Syringa Mobile Home Park Story, Revisited by Community Owner

January 23rd, 2017 No comments

In the NPR story, the blame is on the community owner, tenants, county, and state.  This failure is across-the-board and does not represent the industry as whole, but is a growing problem that needs to be addressed when communities are used for investment purposes by those who don’t know what they are doing.

  • There is no excuse for the manufactured home community owners’ absence in managing his property.
    • Public utilities and infrastructure needs to be addressed.
    • It should be noted that with old infrastructure, you are going to have water line breaks and rare system failures. Many can be avoided, but some can be unknowable in advance.  Redundancy and daily inspections help prevent system failures.
    • The owner may not have the revenue to repair systems, and may need to tap utilities into local public water and wastewater systems.
  • Where is the tenant accountability?  Homes are personal property (unless units are rentals), and there is trash and debris everywhere in the photos from Syringa Mobile Home Park, in Moscow, ID.
  • Judging by the state of a many of the homes in the photos; they should be repaired, demoed, and/or replaced.  By allowing the living conditions to exist, the owner becomes part of the problem.
TomFathNewDurhamEstatesonCommentsOnNPRMobileHomeParkStory-postedIndustryVoicesMHProNews

Image credit, MHProNews. The headline and image are provided by the editor.

  • If homes are being left and are personal property, the county should be responsible with the community owner/tenant to remove homes. ##
tomfathnewdurhamestates-manufacturedhousingindustrymanufacturedhomecommunity-industryvoices-mhpronews

Tom Fath, co-owner, New Durham Estates.

Tom Fath | Operations Manager
New Durham Estates and Home Sales