To aid those for whom any rent increase is too great a burden, the department is proposing an aid program that would use funds from the operations budget. Tenants would have to qualify as low-income, not be receiving other aid and reapply annually. The number of tenants aided each year would depend on available funds, according to the staff report.

OMG, not another non-profit owned park going bust? They now have to DOUBLE the rents on new residents to break even since they didn’t raise the rents annually to match inflation for over a decade. Are you spotting a trend here? And now the city is trying to turn this into some type of quasi-Section 8 mess. Do the voters in Palmdale realize how their money is squandered by these idiots on a daily basis?

STUPIDITY RATING ON A 1 TO 10 BASIS: 8

This one quote sums up the article:

“We’ve increased lot rent only once in the last four years,” said Gilsrud. “And that was by $6.”

If the resident-owned property had a rent of $400 per month and raised it only $6 over four years, then that’s quite a feat since inflation went up over 20% in the past three years alone, which means they would have had to raise the rent by $80 a month just to cover increases in water, sewer, electric, property tax, insurance, etc. So, assuming the park was trying to keep the rent as low as possible when it was purchased four years ago, the park is now $80 per month per lot short on money. That means the park is probably not making any of the perpetual capital expenditures that need to be performed due to lack of funds. So by depriving the park of $80 per month per lot of income the property will eventually fall into complete disrepair. This is the problem when you have a bunch of tenants voting to increase rents – they never will.

STUPIDITY RATING ON A 1 TO 10 SCALE: 10

Bradstreet and Becker think the solution mostly lies with state and local lawmakers. Earlier this month, Democratic Governor Janet Mills signed a bill into law that would force cities and towns to allow mobile homes on any lots zoned for single-family homes. That could alleviate cost pressure over time. “Supply will eventually keep the prices down,” Bradstreet said.

Here’s a reality check. A new mobile home costs around $80,000. The average residential lot in the U.S. costs $80,000. Add them together and you’ve got a $160,000 mobile home offering. So forcing cities to allow mobile homes on single-family home lots (which is never going to happen) and then putting $160,000 mobile homes on the market (as popular as selling dog poop sandwiches) is going to eliminate the affordable housing crisis in Maine?

STUPIDITY RATING ON A 1 TO 10 SCALE: 10

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Non-Profits Squander $7 Million for 60 Families to Own a Trailer Park”.

“Housing affordability is one of the biggest issues facing our state. Our conference has a plan to revitalize our existing housing stock by removing blight from our communities and replacing it with good quality housing units, to work with local communities on what housing strategies are best for them, to expand and create incentives for development, and to establish means-testing for rent-regulated housing to ensure that affordable housing units are occupied by those who truly need them. The legislative package we are putting forward today under the leadership of our housing ranker Senator Pam Helming will deliver affordable homeownership for the state of New York”.

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Big Talk in New York Yields Zero Results”.

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “If You Own a Home in Maine -- And Are Next Door to a Vacant Lot -- You Better Sell Fast.”

Jones said the project might cost more than $1 million. “The treatment system is old,” said Terry Jones, a senior environmental specialist for the DNR. “It was installed in the ’70s and can’t meet the more stringent ammonia and E. coli limits that were put in their permit several years ago. They were supposed to upgrade the system so that they could meet those limits, and they never did.” In 2019, an attorney for Mt. Joy sent a letter to the state “stating the cost for wastewater improvements were beyond what his client could afford,” DNR records show. In early 2020, Mt. Joy submitted a plan to the DNR to demolish its treatment facility and replace it. The department Mt. Joy has sought unsuccessfully to connect to the wastewater systems of Davenport and Eldridge, he said.

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Changes to Wastewater Laws May Put This Mobile Home Park Out of Business Unless $1 Million Can Be Found from an Out-Of-State Buyer”. 

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Park Owners Work Hard to Maintain the Lowest Rents in Youngstown”.

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Residents Hate Rent Increases Regardless of How Minimal They Are”.

ESCONDIDO — For the third time since late February, the City Council has increased the rent for residents at a local mobile home park. As a result of the council’s unanimous March 20 decision, nearly half of the residents at Greencrest Mobilehome Park will see an average increase of about $20.45, averaging between $13.74 and $27.51. The increase will apply to 69 of the park’s 129 spaces, subject to rent control.

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Mobile Home Park Rents Go Up Less Than Every Other Form of Housing in Escondido”.

If Carla Kinsey's rent keeps rising, she worries she'll end up homeless. For more than a decade, she has lived in Avon on the Lake, a community of manufactured homes for older adults in Rochester Hills. When she moved there in 2010, Kinsey was looking to settle in what she called her “final home.” But now, her rent, including the cost of the land where her home sits, consumes more than half of her monthly income. She pays more than $700 every month, up 57% since she moved in. If it wasn’t for food assistance benefits, she said she wouldn’t be able to eat. Kinsey — who is on a fixed income — is also juggling the cost of car and health insurance and utilities. There’s not much left over. She can’t pick up a job because of a rare heart condition that forces her to wear an oxygen machine. “I feel trapped,” Kinsey, 71, said. “I can’t afford to move and I can’t afford to stay.”

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Despite $408,000 House Prices, Avon on the Lake Mobile Home Park Charges Only $700 Per Month!”.

From early 2021 to this year, 73-year-old Tom Kurtz’s monthly rent in Whippoorwill has nearly doubled — from $285 to $540. Maine home values have risen by 22 percent over that time, according to Zillow data. The new owner hiked Kurtz’s rent 32 percent when he took over and has raised it regularly. Similar hikes have come at Maplewood Hill.
What a manipulation of the facts! Of course the residents miss the old mom-and-pop owners as the rents were absurdly low, yet the new rents are still ridiculously low. Stick-built houses in Wiscasset, Maine are $306,000 so that 22 percent increase is $60,000. That 32 percent increase in mobile home lot rents is around $250 per month. What idiot can compare those two stats and say the mobile home one is way worse?
I’m sick of these articles written by obviously young, woke journalists that do not present facts but simply try to manipulate data to make their case in their weak attempt at persuasion.

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Out-Of-State Owners Bring Mobile Home Parks Back to Life and Maintain Rents At Ridiculously Low Levels”.

They both live in manufactured housing — the largest source of unsubsidized affordable housing in the country, particularly for seniors and low-income households. But advocates say that type of housing is quickly becoming unaffordable as private equity firms buy up parks and hike up rents.

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Mobile Home Park Rents Increase to Market Levels Yet Are Still the Least Expensive in the U.S.”.

In other words, the O'Hara mobile homes look like Old Southern mansions and feel like ultra-expensive hotels.

SUGGESTED HEADLINE: “Over-Exaggeration Runs Rampant in Mobile Home Sales Materials”.

I also liked her on Shark Tank, but this story is embarrassing. No way you can spin it that she made a smart financial move.

Well, you basically raise your home up in the air or you leave. There’s no salvation coming from the city as they no doubt will delight in getting the park removed. That was probably the intention from the start. Don’t forget Ronald Reagan’s classic quote “the nine most dangerous words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”.

Best quote of the week:

"There are plenty of codes and regulations in place that can crack down on bad actors in the housing space," he continued. "If we really want to get serious about solving affordable housing for seniors, we need to increase our housing stock, which means reducing barriers to new construction and finding ways to renovate existing properties."

It has been proven over and over that less government regulation yields better economies and greater quality of life for Americans. Those who refuse to accept this fact can only be classified as complete idiots – or work for the government. Or both.

The same reasons that make mobile homes are the most inexpensive form of housing on earth makes them more susceptible to damage from a tornado. That’s the trade-off. Do you prioritize 79 years of affordable day-to-day living (the average life expectancy in the U.S.) over the one-in-a-million risk of a tornado or do you live in an underground bunker for 79 years so that if you get hit by a tornado you’re prepared? Everyone takes risks every day and have to weigh the risk vs. the reward. If you drive a car you are a zillion times more likely to get killed than in a tornado so maybe we should discourage that, too. I like walking so I’m fine with that.

So the residents think a 10% rent increase is a scandalous thing when inflation is up that much or higher on the park’s costs? Well I have news for the bureaucrats of Chico: if you don’t let rents track or exceed inflation then you better get ready for the “land for sale” signs to go up and the parks being redeveloped because only government workers (and those who have no real-life experience) think that property owners are going to put up with that nonsense without simply pushing the “eject” button and redeveloping into a different and more profitable use.

But it’s also an opportunity for innovative solutions: A new study of Michigan manufactured housing proposes reducing utility bills by pairing clean community solar power with programs to weatherize manufactured homes – especially in combination with efficient electrification upgrades.The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) defines community solar power as any solar project or purchasing program within a geographic area that benefits multiple customers, such as individuals, businesses, nonprofits, or other groups. Typically, an off-site solar array generates the energy.

I was renting a car in Austin recently and they were out of cars – except for Tesla electric cars. They had about 30 of them and nobody would take one. This whole electric craze has got to end as nobody wants the stuff and it’s way too expensive without subsidies. Every time I read an article like this it reminds me of some fashion trend that years from now people will say “gosh, that’s stupid, what idiot would wear an outfit like that” and everyone who was around at the time says “I don’t know, they’d have to be insane”.

Just ask the former CEO of Hertz about the electricity craze – I’m sure he’ll have a strong opinion.

That new plant will enable ZenniHome to bolster production, and, parallel to that, the Navajo Nation plans to spend another $50 million to buy around 200 of the prefabricated homes from the new facility.

Wait a minute, they’re going to spend $50 milion for 200 mobile homes – that’s $250,000 per home! Now I know that non-profits make the worst financial decisions on earth but this one’s record breaking. Why not just call the local Clayton dealer and get the exact same thing for $50,000? Something’s fishy about this story.

In conventional mobile home parks, residents own the home but rent the lot. In a resident-owned community, residents own and manage the property cooperatively. Residents get a say in setting rent and investing in upkeep and improvements. There are many advantages to this system, advocates say, but the biggest is stability: Residents must approve lot fees, and generally they stay fairly stable. “We’ve increased lot rent only once in the last four years,” said Gilsrud. “And that was by $6.” 

Oh no, not this story again. Look, I know that American math skills are at an all-time low, but if the residents – who own the park – raised the rent only $6 in the past four years at a time when inflation is up 20% over just the past three years, then this park cannot possibly survive financially. Although the residents can buy a park with the help of a non-profit that guarantees the debt, operating costs are the same for corporate owners as they are for resident owners. Since the residents vote to increase rents, then they never will because the majority will refuse. And the only one with skin in the game is the non-profit that guaranteed the loan. I hope those guarantors don’t read articles like this because they will soon figure out that they are screwed.

If you set aside $165 million for mobile homes for the whole U.S., that’s only $3.3 million per state. That’s absolutely nothing. 8% of Americans live in mobile homes. There are 300 million Americans, so 8% is 24 million people. Assuming 3 per household, that’s around 8 million mobile homes. So the government has allocated literally $20 per home for help. Ouch. This story sounds much grander than the reality. When you actually look at the numbers it’s … nothing.

A group of people who live at Old Orchard Village and Atlantic Village are attempting to form a tenants' cooperative to try and buy the parks for themselves.
But it's no small task.

The accent needs to be on the words “no small task”. That’s an understatement. The seller wants around $40 million. The tenants probably have collectively around $1,000 in cash between them. So the only way this deal happens is if a non-profit guarantees the debt. That’s the problem with all these resident deals – they forget the one small thing which is they have to find the “rich uncle” to actually secure the financing. And nobody wants to personally guarantee this stuff in non-profit land. So that’s why these articles are so infuriating as they suggest there is the remote possibility of success when, in fact, there is none. That would be like articles suggesting that homeless people could make big money by renting out their shopping cart wth a tarp roof as Air BNBs.

Debbie Suits, who lives at a mobile home park in Tempe, said when she and her husband moved in five years ago, the lot lease was $700. Now it’s $1,000, but she said they have nowhere else to go. “Go where? My husband and I have talked about it — that's enough, we’re out of here, tell me where else I can go,” Suits said.

Arizona is one of the 15 most expensive states in the U.S. to live in. Unfortunately, a whole bunch of seniors moved there for the weather back when the state was cheap. Times change. If you are a senior who cannot afford to pay $1,000 per month lot rent, let me suggest you look into the other 35 states which are MUCH less expensive, such as my home state of Missouri where lot rents average around $300 per month.

As for the non-profit which promoted this article – “Love From Above” – the problem persists that the only way that tenants can buy parks is with the help of a non-profit that personally guarantees the loan. And that’s about as likely on a large scale as finding people to volunteer to set themselves on fire.