In the wake of two unilateral HUD directives this week concerning fundamental elements of the regulation of manufactured home installations, MHARR, on April 14, 2016 sent a communication (see, copy attached) to the program Administrator calling for those directives to be withdrawn and the underlying matters addressed by each to be submitted to the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) as required by the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000.
Responding to yet another blatant over-reach of HUD’s authority by the Administrator in violation of both the substantive requirements of the 2000 reform law and its procedural safeguards (including mandatory consideration of cost impacts and mandatory MHCC pre-review of any change to the HUD program regulations or enforcement practices), the MHARR communication, once again, takes the lead in strongly and clearly objecting to these baseless, unnecessary and damaging actions.
The significance of these actions, moreover – and their extremely negative consequences for both the industry and consumers — is compounded by the fact that they are part of a broader rampage by the program Administrator. This rampage, involving successive, unilateral regulatory actions (such as the outrageous HUD on-site construction rule and the Administrator’s refusal to even consider an enforcement deferral or significant modifications that all stakeholders agree are essential) will seriously damage the industry’s ability to compete in new emerging markets and needlessly exclude large numbers of consumers from the housing market altogether.
Insofar as the service of the current selected, career Administrator (instead of an appointed, non-career administrator), in itself violates the 2000 reform law on a daily, ongoing basis, industry members should rightfully ask why this unlawful and highly damaging pseudo-regulatory activity — all of which directly benefits industry competitors (i.e., site-builders, realtors, the rental housing industry, etc.) — is occurring, and with whose support or approval is it occurring?
On one level, such activity, analyzed in detail by MHARR in a publication that will be released soon, validates the decision of the MHARR Board of Directors to pursue a specific challenge to uphold the directives of the 2000 reform law. At the same time, though, Washington, D.C. observers are increasingly questioning whether any such activity by the program Administrator could or would be taking place without support from both outside and within the industry. Further relevant details concerning all of this will be published by MHARR soon.
April-8-2015-MHARR-pdf
HUDFOUNDATIONLETTER-pdf
InterimGuidanceonuseofFrost-freeFoundationMemo
