“The bargain struck between landlord and tenant is always advantageous to the former in the greatest possible degree.... Besides the advantage he derives from the nature of the case, he derives a further advantage from his position, his larger fortune and greater credit and standing”.

That’s a quote from Karl Marx, the founder of communism. Folks in Maine sound more and more like him every day, which is odd for a state that was originally based on the concept of hard work and not handouts. What a disappointment Maine has become on all fronts. It comes in near the bottom of all states in everything from economic strength to education. Clearly, whatever their leaders are doing – including the new rent control push – is not working. Of course, it hasn’t gone well for most Marx advocates in the past.

Finally, someone has the guts to stand up to the Washington socialists. But what a shame that it has to go to that extreme simply to protect their property rights. What a nasty state.

Here’s an important announcement for all woke journalists: Montana is trifecta red. It has a Republican Governor, Senate and House. There is literally a 0% chance of ever enacting rent control. So you need to go somewhere else with your socialism pandering. Maine would be a good place. Pack up all your worldly goods in a U-Haul, jump on I-90, and you can be there in 35 hours.

Sure, stop all rent increases forever. Why not make landlords reduce their rents 10% annually instead? Why not end private property completely and just take it from the owners and give it to the tenants?

I know these city council people know better than to embrace this socialist nonsense, but they simply don’t have the guts to stand up to the screaming mob. What a bunch of cowards.

At-large Councilor Marc Lessard said limiting park owners from raising rent would create a slippery slope. “I know some people might disagree with me, but this is just a path to control businesses on investment,” Lessard said. 

At least most of the city council people in Biddeford, Maine understand what socialism is and have no interest in embracing it.

A group that represents manufactured housing park owners filed suit against the state of Washington over rent control. In its lawsuit filed last week, Manufactured Housing Communities of Washington says the state’s rent control law, which passed last year, is already forcing their parks to shut down.

Ah, yes, this is the moment that the Washington socialists have been dreading, the exposure of that most basic rent control issue: park owners simply redeveloping their properties into uses that don’t have rent control. You see, that’s the problem with this whole socialist narrative in a country that still has capitalist freedoms. You can’t successfully have rent control if property owners still have the freedom of choice to simply take their marbles and go home. Watch for a huge number of mobile home parks in Washington to disappear soon.

If Ron DeSantis does not veto this socialist agenda, then he’s absolutely pathetic. I would expect this in California but not in Florida. WTF.

“What I feel is betrayed,” Commissioner Daniel Finn, who represents mobile park residents and lives in a mobile home, told San José Spotlight.

They ask the owner of eight mobile home parks their opinion on rent increases because they would obviously be a more knowledgeable authority on such things than a crackpot single resident in a park that would clearly be averse to even a $1 increase. This is not a form of betrayal but simply good, common sense. Can you imagine asking a McDonald’s customer if they are happy with the McChicken going from $1 to $3? No, you’d talk to the franchisees to get the true picture.

Homes built after June 1976 must comply with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) standards for safety, durability, and energy efficiency, making modern manufactured homes a fundamentally different product from the mobile homes many local zoning codes were written to exclude.

I know the MH industry thinks it’s making headway with mantras such as this, but you are NEVER going to weaken the stigma against the mobile home product with the concept that these things are “fundamentally different” from “trailers” of the past. The only way you’re ever going to get Americans to like the product is to create radical new designs that people like to look at and aspire to live in. The “tiny home” movement only works because they look nothing like mobile homes. Same for the 3-D printed home prototypes. Beauty may be only skin-deep but that’s the part the industry is lacking in and has caused the stigma to begin with. Fix that, and you have a chance of getting more appreciation from the public. Harping on things like “energy efficiency” turns on absolutely no one.

Mobile home parks across the country are being snapped up by institutional investors who see them as low-risk, high-return assets. It’s a shift that’s often followed by sharp rent increases for residents who can’t easily move.

Let’s explore this quote, which is based on the standard narrative of the “Free Rent Movement” advocates.

Yes, mobile home parks are being bought by institutions because they have a far superior business model to apartments. Why? Because apartments are subject to overbuilding and oversupply while there have been nearly zero new parks built in the last 50 years due to city and town zoning restrictions. It’s called “supply vs. demand”.

Yes, when professional investors buy mobile home parks, they tend to raise the rents to market levels, unhindered by what mom and pop has done in the past. With mobile home park lot rents averaging around $400 per month nationally -- despite apartments at $2,000 per month and single-family at $400,000 – there is no question that lot rents are way, way too low and need to go up substantially. Liberals should not forget Kamala Harris’ beloved catchphrase “what can be, unburdened by what has been" because if that was true for her dreams then it’s just as true for setting lot rents at appropriate levels by legitimate businesspeople.

No, the media is once again taking their favorite quote out of context when they claim the problem is that the residents “can’t easily move”. This has nothing to do with the mobile homes not being “mobile”. Instead, it’s all about there not being any options cheaper than the mobile home park, even after the rents go up. Studies have shown that mobile home park lot rents went up at half the speed of inflation since the 1960s, while all other housing went up by twice the amount of inflation. That’s the whole issue. Mobile home park residents received an outrageous discount on rent for decades and now don’t like paying the prices they should have been paying all along.

And another park bites the dust – times two.

State Sen. Kelly Dooner, R. Taunton, filed a bill S.2738, "An Act Addressing Rising Insurance Costs for Manufactured Home Residents," to address the problem. If passed, it would establish a commission “to investigate the availability, affordability, and regulatory treatment of homeowners insurance” for manufactured homes in Massachusetts, according to the language in the bill. 

Does anyone reading this think it’s anything more than a total waste of time? Only an academic idiot would think that talking about rising prices will, in any way, lower them. It won’t.

Among local concerns are commonly held assumptions that manufactured communities reduce neighboring property values and negatively affect an area’s aesthetics, crime rates, and additional infrastructure costs. AscentDS’s Kim said these views are often misguided. 

Look up any mobile home park on Zillow. Look at the price of a single-family home right next to the mobile home park. Then look at the price of an identical home a block from the mobile home park. The home next to the park is about 20% less. It’s simply a fact that Americans don’t like living next to mobile home parks. Rather than insult everyone’s intelligence, why not just tell it like it is? Nobody wants to live next to affordable housing, whether it’s mobile home parks or apartments. Mayors, city councils, zoning departments and homeowners across the nation all know this. And that’s why there will never be any new permits ever issued for mobile home parks in any city in which people would want to live.

Residents of Norway Commons, a manufactured home community for those 55 or older, attended a Select Board meeting Thursday to protest what they said were rapidly rising lot rents and urged the board to consider rent stabilization measures.

Week after week the Maine media is doing a blitz to convince you that socialist rent control is mandatory in that tiny, irrelevant state. Maine is such a disappointment, ranking in the bottom ten states in economy, education and population growth. Clearly their leftist policies are a complete failure. If they pass rent control in Maine then the housing stock will go down the drain and/or be redeveloped. But in a state that can do nothing right, why not?

“There's a lot of people in here that just are living on Social Security and that's it. And they just. It's not affordable.”

Perhaps it’s time to admit that living in Florida is probably not the best idea for someone living on Social Security. Florida has high living costs in every category, most notably insurance. If you are living on the $1,200 a month that the average Social Security recipient receives, then you should live in the Midwest where things cost 50% less. If you choose to live in Florida – despite the extremely high cost – then don’t complain about it because YOU made that decision. I’d love to fly first-class but I can’t rationalize it. If I did fly first-class I’d look pretty dumb if I complained the entire flight about how much it cost. It’s called “personal accountability”.

If a rent increase is demanded, it would have to be justified by documents such as invoices or material facts proving that there has been an increase in costs and expenses for the landlord. Similarly, the rent would have to be reduced if a service or facility no longer works or is no longer available to the tenant.

If Ron DeSantis does not veto this socialist crap then he’s not worthy of keeping his job. I don’t live in Florida, nor do I have any mobile home park interests there, but if you do then you need to get on the phone and call your representatives and tell them how unacceptable this is.

I’ve been getting a lot of calls from Florida park owners befuddled on how their red state has shifted so extremely blue over the past few years when it comes to tenant laws. I couldn’t agree more – Ron DeSantis has apparently lost his mind. If he had any backbone he would theaten to veto all these bills and shut them down immediately, yet he continues to sign them into law. Can there be a more socialist agenda than asking private park owners to beg to try to increase their rents? In a red state? WTF.

During their retreat back to Berlin in 1944, the German army cut down a massive number of trees to block the roads and slow the U.S. and Russian troops down. It didn’t alter the end result, but maybe it held back the Allied victory by a few days. Delaying a rent increase by a couple months on a technicality is not quite a worthwhile effort, but if it gives the tenants some perverse sense of victory then who cares?

And another park bites the dust.

One resident, Sherry Russell, found out that her lot rent would increase on February 1 by 70%, and within six days of taking over ownership of the trailer park

Woke writers always try to use hyperbole and focus on simply the percent of increase instead of the nominal amount. Yes, it looks like it went up 70%. But 70% was only around $250 per month as the rent was ridiculously low. Now $250 may sound like a lot, but that’s a fraction of what apartment rents have gone up, as well as health insurance and auto prices. Remember that the McChicken went up 300% in one year but it’s still the cheapest thing on the McDonald’s menu.

But here’s the most important point. Kentucky is trifecta Red and, as a result, the chances of rent control are absolutely zero. This writer needs to focus their socialist whining attention on trifecta Blue states, like Maryland and Massachusetts, where it might actually have some impact. I know that “you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take” but sometimes taking a really dumb shot makes you look just stupid.

Residents have told town officials that since the park changed hands in 2021, lot rents have increased while maintenance and responsiveness have declined, leaving many — particularly seniors — feeling vulnerable and unheard.

Of all the arguments these “Free Rent Movement” groups try to make, the most pathetic is the claim that new owners – who inject massive capital in trying to bring these old, ugly parks back to life – are somehow harming the residents rather than saving them. If they want to complain about higher rents, that’s fine. It’s a fact that rents go up across all forms of U.S. housing, as do all related costs, and it’s called “inflation”. But to pretend that this property is going “backward” in quality, with all the work the new owners are doing, is absolutely absurd. I have NEVER seen a park that was not significantly improved in living conditions under new ownership. Have you?

The issues in California are not about consumer protection but simply Socialism vs. Capitalism. You can’t argue that $850 per month in lot rent is abhorrent when the actual stats for Fortuna are a single-family home average of $375,000 and an average apartment rent of $1,720 per month. But to the socialist mind, all rent should be free. They simply don’t believe in the capitalist system of “free market” in which supply and demand set pricing and not the government. They want all prices to be mandated and cheap.

And another park bites the dust.

The purchase is supported by a $4.7 million loan from HCR’s Manufactured Home Advantage Program, a $420,000 loan from the Village of Lake Placid, a $1.6 million loan from Champlain National Bank, and an equity investment from Mr. Montag. Homestead Development Corporation partnered with the Homeowners Association to assist with administrative work required for the purchase.

Now that sounds like a solid financial footing, right? Anyone want to bet that, five years from now, this “Frankenstein” lending construction has completely collapsed, and the park is back on the market? Non-profits don’t seem to realize that anything other than a legitimate long-term mortgage from a reputable lender is simply a quick fix that never holds together. I would refer people to the recent loan defaults on no less than four tenant-owned parks in Colorado as evidence of this fact. If the non-profits want to inject real non-refundable money and get a real 10-year conduit or agency loan based on actual net income, I can respect that. But instead they never want to actually commit for the long term – just enough to get their 5 minutes of virtue signaling fame and then move on.  I wish someone would track these “tenant-owned” deals and see how many actually make it over the long term. It can’t be many.

I get calls from park owners in Florida all the time trying to understand how the state got so screwed up when it comes to mobile home park regulations. Apparently the “Sunshine State” is like an M&M with a Red outside coating hiding a nasty Blue filling on the inside. If this bill passes you should expect even faster redevelopment of “trailer park” properties and much less enthusiasm by investors to bring old Florida mobile home parks back to life by injecting fresh capital into failing infrastructure and management.