Mobile Home Park News Briefing

State lawmakers are discussing a bill that would encourage the creation of resident-owned communities by providing tax incentives to businesses that sell to cooperatives. The bill would provide a tax deduction of up to $750,000 on capital gains for owners who sell to cooperatives.

In all fairness, this idea was originally floated by Congressman Keith Ellison about a decade ago. Back then, he suggested advantageous tax treatment if you didn’t tear the park down. This time around it’s focused on selling to residents. But it’s a good idea regardless of who proposes it. If you made a compelling economic benefit to selling parks to residents as opposed to corporate buyers then I’m betting every park that qualifies would be sold to residents.

Here's what the resident said:

"They raised the rent by $75 last year, and the latest increase will come this May. Rent is going up by $100 for a total of $550 per month.  They figure they got you over a barrel because there's no way to go anywhere, I mean, you're stuck," said Eyneart. 

Here's what the park owner said:

His Burien-based company has invested more than $130,000 into the park, he said. That includes hauling away abandoned cars and trailers, installing new mailboxes and putting in new plumbing. 

Here's what the journalist said:

Residents acknowledge improvements have been made. But that doesn't change the circumstances for people who can't afford the rent hikes.

Clearly, there are many points of view here, but let's explore what's true from what's false.

1. A $550 per month lot rent in Orofino, Idaho is insanely cheap. The median single-family home price is $348,000 and the average apartment rent is over $1,675 per month. Let's stop pretending that a mobile home park lot rent that is 70% less than all other forms of housing is somehow too high.
2. No resident is "stuck" in a mobile home park any more than they are "stuck" in a house or condo. If you have a better living option then sell your home and move to it. Nobody ever bought or sold a mobile home with the expectation of moving it at a cost of $10,000+. And most of the cost of moving mobile homes is the result of HUD requirements!
3. New owners always seem to put significant capital into fixing aging infrastructure and bringing the property "back to life". Living conditions – without exception – are superior under professional management.
4. What is NOT a part of owning any property in the U.S. – regardless of single-family or multi-family – is inheriting some type of governmental responsibility for marginal tenants. That's the job of the U.S. government. Can you imagine an article on McDonald's where they are criticized for eliminating the "Value Meal" because they are not worrying enough about customers who can't afford to eat in a modern America. The reason this topic always comes up is simple: the government cannot afford the massive size of Section 8 programs. So everyone's trying to pin this responsibility on private owners because the government has defaulted on their obligation.

I wish that everyone – owners, tenants and the media – could agree on the basic truths of life in America. You can plead your point, but don't insult our intelligence.

The Manufactured Housing Opportunity & Revitalization Program (MORE) pays for mobile home repairs, if the homes are in a mobile home park and owned by someone making less than 80% of Humboldt’s median income. Contractors hired by the city do the work. 

This is a good idea and one that would help preserve marginal residents from being homeless or going into Section 8. Any sane person would support this concept.

And another park bites the dust.

Connors acknowledged the rent bill is a challenge, but said her legislation offers a small but meaningful step toward addressing Washington’s critical housing shortage by making it easier to buy, sell and finance manufactured homes.

If you reclassify mobile homes as real property they will no longer be able to be financed by the industry lenders of PEP, CASH, Triad, and Zippy. Real mortgage companies will never waste time on “trailer” mortgages (which will be sub-$50,000 in most cases) so the bureaucrats will – in one stroke of the pen – kill off the entire mobile home industry in Washington. Absolute genius, right? Do any of these folks bother doing diligence before they propose such stupidity?

The property with hundreds of home lots and amenities in the northern metro area last sold 14 years ago for less than a third as much money.

Making $100 million with a single mobile home park in 14 years is a challenge but fully attainable apparently.

And another park bites the dust.

“I’m here to speak in opposition to this mobile home development we’ve got going on Needmore Road but I’m not here alone. I’m here with a group from my community, I’m here with some 400 names on a petition. These people are made up from anything from elderly people, young families with small children that lives in our area, who are all very concerned about our community. Your taxpayers and your voters are here to voice our concerns on this matter,” Carnes said to the commission.

Anyone who has ever appeared at a city council or zoning hearing on a proposed mobile home park development or expansion can completely commiserate with how this went. You literally go up to the podium, give your presentation, take your seat and 500 people then speak in opposition. You get greater turnout to a zoning meeting on a proposed mobile home park then you would at a high-school football game. That’s what keeps the “moat” around mobile home parks and protects them from overbuilding (the nemesis of retail, office, industrial, apartment and self-storage niches). Because of the aggressive hatred that the average American has for mobile home parks, this is exactly why so few new ones are ever built.

The Cedar Falls Resident Cooperative bought the park for $8 million to prevent a corporate sale that could have led to steep rent increases.

With the sale finalized, residents will see a $100 monthly rent increase, but they believe ownership will help keep costs stable in the long run.

"It's such a relief," she said. "I don’t have to worry about losing my home."

So let me get this straight: the residents deliberately bought the park and increased their rent immediately by $100 per month to fend off a professional investor from buying it and maybe raising the rent $50 or so. This is literally a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face. If the park had sold to a professional buyer, the residents would have received a smaller rent increase, capital poured into fixing aging infrastructure, and professional management with proper collections and rules enforcement. But instead the residents now have no money to make repairs, rent that is higher than what a professional owner would have charged, and a management that will never collect or enforce rules correctly.

And the residents are celebrating what exactly? That they blew it?

And another park bites the dust.

And multiple parks potentially bite the dust.

And another park bites the dust.

Roughly one-fifth of mobile home parks across the nation have been purchased by large-scale investors in recent years, according to a 2022 study by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, a nonprofit foundation based in Massachusetts.

I’m not sure if the author of this story bothered to do any fact-checking, but there are around 44,000 mobile home parks in the U.S. and if 20% were purchased by large corporate investors in the last few years that would equate to around 10,000 parks. The actual number is probably more like 500 parks tops (ELS – the nation’s largest MH REIT – only owns around 400 in 30 years). And that’s around 1% NOT 10%. But the facts don’t much matter in this case because corporate ownership has nothing to do with higher lot rents.

The real reason rents are increasing across the nation is not because of large corporate owners, but simply because mobile home park lot rents are insanely, ridiculously low compared to $400,000 houses and $2,000 per month apartments. It’s called the free-market system, and it’s the backbone of America capitalism. Price controls are a part of socialism and “can lead to shortages, black markets, and reduced quality, ultimately hindering economic efficiency”. And that’s why the legislature in New Jersey hopefully won’t fall for this nonsense.

The bills, backed mostly by Democrats, ultimately didn’t pass, even with a Democratic trifecta in state government. Republicans regained control of the state House this year. “We were all so disappointed,” Wisniewski says. “I don’t think we’re going to get very far with the Legislature at all.”

Just because a woke state senator proposes rent control does not mean that it will pass. Most bureaucrats are fully aware that rent control is literally the death sentence for housing, as it strangulates needed investment – resulting in no new starts and no capital improvements. That’s why, in over 100 years, only six states and the District of Columbia have embraced it. And they’re all doing terrible as a result.

And another park bites the dust.

And another park bites the dust.

And another park bites the dust.

A resident of the mobile home park told MTFP that their $510 monthly lot rent will increase by $65 and that they will be charged $45 for utilities, totaling an annual $1,320 raise. The increase is due to rising maintenance costs and property taxes, the notice stated. Another resident told MTFP the $1,320 would cover the costs of planned projects for the park, including an office remodel, dumpster and mailbox replacements, road maintenance and community events. Park residents wrote a letter to the company, which was provided to MTFP, stating that they would not comply with the rent and utility-free increases and that the proposal for new mailboxes, dumpsters and community events is “blatantly insulting.”

What’s “blatantly insulting” is that the writer of the article never bothered to spend even 60 seconds of research on the housing market in Helena, Montana. So here are the numbers they ignored:

Single-family home cost: $439,800

3-Bedroom apartment rent: $1,330 per month

So tell me again how $575 per month is highway robbery? Now you know why they avoided the stats.

The floors are caving in. The roofs are leaking. The walls that lack insulation invite mold. For residents of Rudd’s Mobile Home Park in Richmond’s Southside, these aren’t just minor inconveniences — they’re daily battles in a place they call home. Unlike traditional renters, most mobile home residents own their homes. (What they rent is the land or lot under where they live.) That means when things start falling apart, the responsibility to fix them falls on their shoulders. But many say they are barely making ends meet, making expensive repairs out of reach.

I’m sure the author of this article was really mad that they could not find a way to blame the park owner for the residents not maintaining their own homes. Believe me, if they could have, they would have.

So the residents spent $18 million for 92 lots – that’s around $200,000 per space (and probably the most ever paid for a mobile home park in that area). And the deal was cobbled together out of short-term loans. Who wants to place a bet that this deal will be back on the market in five years – or whenever the loans come due?

And another park bites the dust.

A new mobile home park in Maine moves forward despite the anger of surrounding property owners. Affordable housing has become so severe that people are getting desperate – even city bureaucrats.

And another park bites the dust.

Another park bites the dust. The rents were too low to allow needed capital repairs and make a profit greater than alternative uses. It’s not rocket science.

Residents, including Dudleys Herrera, say feel ignored after they’ve repeatedly contacted the city and county about the growing issues, including trash and contamination. City officials said no citations have been issued at Li’l Abner, as they hope to work with developers to address the issues rather than impose penalties.

This park is being torn down. People are still living there who should have already vacated. Why would anyone think that the city would be interested in wasting more time on this? They simply need to leave.

Another park bites the dust.