It is not only potentially useful, but important for manufactured home professionals and affordable policy advocates open to manufactured housing to consider research and position statements like the one below from Prosperity Now, the Housing Assistance Council (HAC), and the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. The document cited and republished herein is a resource item with the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC).  It was published on their site earlier this year (3-2023).  Note providing this information is not to be construed as agreement with all of their various points or arguments. That noted, it should be apparent that these groups are potential allies – supporters or cheerleaders – for more manufactured housing. There are items these three nonprofits raised that for whatever reason may not be raised by the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI).  Note, for instance, the minibus enactment point this trio of nonprofit/advocates made in their text below. Quoting: “HUD – Manufactured Housing Modernization Act of 2019.” The use of ‘must move’ legislation, like a budget-governmental funding measure, is one of several proven ways that legislation can be ‘moved’ in an often sharply divided Congress.

Note that we now know that the “official” count on the number of manufactured home communities is just over 50,000, per the Lincoln Institute’s George McCarthy. McCarthy told MHProNews that: “based on new FEMA data, there are 50,393 MHCs in the US.”

Also note, that MHProNews would editorially disagree with their stance on certain items, such the DOE energy rule. For more on that topic, see Part II of this article.

Part I

Manufactured Housing

By Doug Ryan, Vice President, Policy & Applied Research, Prosperity Now;
Lance George, Director of Research & Information, Housing Assistance Council;
and Kimberly Vermeer, Consultant to Lincoln Institute of Land Policy & I’m HOME Network

Manufactured homes are an often overlooked and maligned component of our nation’s housing stock, but these homes are an important source of housing for millions of Americans, especially those with low incomes and in rural areas. Although the physical quality of manufactured housing continues to progress, the basic delivery system of how these homes are sold and financed, and how manufactured home communities are owned and managed are all still in need of improvement to ensure that they are a viable and quality source of affordable housing.

ISSUE SUMMARY

There are approximately 6.7 million occupied manufactured homes in the U.S., comprising about 6% of the nation’s housing stock. Manufactured Housing is factory-built housing constructed to meet a national standard—the HUD Code—rather than local building codes. More than half of all manufactured homes are in rural areas around the country. In a typical year, new manufactured housing accounts for about 10% of all new single-family housing starts. Although the demographics of manufactured housing are changing, lower-income households are still the primary residents of manufactured homes. Manufactured homes have their origins in the automobile and recreational travel trailer industry, but modern factory-built dwellings produced today are more comparable in quality and safety to conventionally constructed single family homes. It is equally important to recognize the existing stock of older manufactured or mobile homes. An estimated one-fifth of currently occupied manufactured homes were built before 1980. These older units are likely to be smaller, less safe, and have fewer amenities and less investment potential than newer manufactured homes. The adoption of the HUD Code (see below) in 1976 and subsequent updates have significantly improved this housing type. Affordability and convenience make manufactured homes a popular housing option. The average sales price of a new manufactured home in 2021 was $108,400 (excluding land costs); much less compared to an average of $ $365,900 (excluding land costs) for a newly constructed single-family home and approximately $357,100 (including land costs) for an existing site-built home (see the U.S. Census Bureau’s Manufactured Homes Survey and Characteristics of New Housing, along with the Manufactured Housing Institute’s 2022 Manufactured Housing Facts and the National Association of Realtors’ Median Sales Price of Existing Homes). Manufactured homes cost about half of what site-built homes cost per square foot, though transportation and onsite work slightly increase the final costs. Even though the purchase price of manufactured homes can be relatively affordable, financing them may not. Contrary to common narratives, just about 42% of manufactured homes are financed with personal property, or chattel loans (see the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Manufactured Housing Finance: New Insights from the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data (2021). With shorter terms and higher interest rates, personal property loans are generally less beneficial for consumers than conventional mortgage financing. Chattel loans do, however, typically have lower closing costs and can close faster than conventional mortgages. Approximately 93% of chattel manufactured home loans in 2019 were classified as high cost (having a substantially high interest rate) which is more than eight times the level of high-cost lending for all homes nationally according to the Bureau. Data from the “Home Mortgage Disclosure Act” allows for a greater understanding of how specific manufactured home characteristics impact consumer lending rates and affordability. Borrowers whose loan was secured by both the unit and land on which the home is placed had a lower rate of high-cost lending at about 52%. In some cases, dealers resort to unscrupulous sales and financing tactics, trapping consumers into unaffordable loans.  See The Mobile Home Trap: How a Warren Buffett Empire Preys on the Poor.

A significant portion of manufactured and mobile homes are in community or park settings, though this is becoming less common. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2020, approximately 27% of new manufactured homes were sited in such settings. Estimates suggest that approximately 40% of all manufactured homes are in 45,000 to 50,000 land lease communities. Though about three quarters of manufactured homes are owner-occupied, the sector has a history of being placed on rented land and therefore manufactured homes have a pattern of land tenure status that is unique to this form of housing. In manufactured home communities, many residents own their homes and rent the land, which can devalue the asset. Ownership of land is an important component to nearly every aspect of manufactured housing, ranging from quality to assets and wealth accumulation. Residents who do not have control over the land on which their home is placed often have reduced legal protections compared to other homeowners. Other common concerns faced by tenants of manufactured home communities include excessive rent increases, poor park management and maintenance, restrictive rules, and restricted access to municipal services. For these and other reasons, alternative park ownership models, such as resident, nonprofit, and government ownership are gaining traction.

The HUD Code

An important factor in the designation of a manufactured home is whether the unit was built before or after June 15, 1976. This date marked the implementation of the “Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards Act” (42 U.S.C. Sections 5401-5426) regulating the construction of manufactured homes and commonly referred to as the “HUD code.” HUD developed and administers the code that implements the statute. These federal standards regulate manufactured housing design and construction, strength and durability, transportability, fire resistance, and energy efficiency. The HUD code evolves over time and has undergone several major modifications since 1976. In 2018, HUD launched an effort to revise various regulations and other guidance governing the HUD Code and issued a proposed rule for comment in July 2022. Look for the final rule to be issued in 2023.

The “Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act” (PL 111-203) Enacted in 2010, Dodd-Frank revised TILA to establish specific protections for mortgage loans, origination activities, and high-cost lending. These provisions enhance consumer protections for purchasers of manufactured homes. DoddFrank also created what’s now known as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to supervise manufactured housing finance activities. S. 2155 (above) modifies one provision of Dodd-Frank.

WHAT TO SAY TO LEGISLATORS

Advocates should speak to lawmakers with the message that:

• Manufactured homeowners should be provided opportunities to obtain standard mortgage lending instead of more costly personal property loans.
• Borrowers with personal property loans should be afforded consumer protections consistent with real property or standard mortgage loans.
• Legislation should be enacted that limits predatory lending practices involving manufactured homes.
• HUD must issue guidance to implement the HUD “Manufactured Housing Modernization Act of 2019.”

• HUD must issue a final rule to update the HUD Code and incorporate the DOE Energy Efficiency Standards.
• HUD should revise the Title I Manufactured Housing loan program to provide an affordable and equitable financing alternative for chattel loans.
• USDA, HUD, and the GSEs should be encouraged to conduct innovative and responsible pilot programs to improve manufactured homeowners’ access to credit.
• The GSEs should be held accountable to implement the manufactured housing elements of their current Duty to Serve plans.

• Policies and programs should be enacted to facilitate manufactured housing community preservation, such as protection from community sales, closures, and predatory rent increases. Residents should be properly notified and given first right of refusal on the sale of their community.
• Improved data collection for manufactured homes should be incorporated into publicly available data resources such as the “Home Mortgage Disclosure Act,” The American

Community Survey, and the American Housing Survey. Manufactured home data should indicate property status (personal property or real property) and location information indicating whether the unit is in a manufactured home community or on a scattered site lot. The inclusion of these updated and enhanced manufactured home data would provide a much more complete assessment of manufactured housing.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

I’m HOME Network, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, https://www.lincolninst.edu/our-work/ innovations-in-manufactured-homes-networkim-home.

The Housing Assistance Council: 202-824-8600, http://www.ruralhome.org/.

Rural Data Portal: http://www.ruraldataportal. org/.

Manufactured Homes by County (Interactive Map): http://bit.ly/1KDssyX.

High Cost Manufactured Home Loans by County (Interactive Map): http://bit.ly/14QHVLk.

Next Step: https://nextstepus.org/.

ROC USA: 603-856-0246 http://www.rocusa.org.

National Consumer Law Center: 202-452-6352 http://www.nclc.org/issues/manufacturedhousing.html.

National Manufactured Homeowners Association: http://www.nmhoa.org/. ##

A download of the document above is available at this link here. Once more for clarity, these are the views of those who created the information posted above.

Part II – Additional Information with More MHProNews Analysis 

MHProNews asked Bing AI to search the web for information on this inquiry.

> “When did the Manufactured Housing Institute mention in the last 2 years or so the need for HUD to issue guidance to implement the HUD “Manufactured Housing Modernization Act of 2019.”

Three quick observations from the above.

1. Note that none of the items mentioned above are actually on the MHI website?
2. Then note that MHI, per this Bing AI search, has not mentioned the lack of implementation of the “Manufactured Housing Modernization Act of 2019” in about 4 years?
3. Note too that this fits the pattern cited by the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) in the 2022 White Paper.  MHARR’s study said that legislation that ought to be useful for the industry rarely ‘reaches the ground’ when it comes to proper implementation. 

On the DOE energy rule issue, federal attorneys have moved for the dismissal of the MHI-Texas Manufactured Housing Association lawsuit.

Federal Attorneys Move to Dismiss Manufactured Housing Institute-Texas Manufactured Housing Assoc (MHI-TMHA) Lawsuit-DOE’s Legal Arguments and CEO Lesli Gooch Ph.D. Exposé; plus MHStocks Update

In an interview with MHProNews, MHARR’s senior advisor and founding president and CEO, Danny Ghorbani, laid out the step-by-step history of the DOE energy rule. See that at this link here, which included evidence of MHI playing both sides of the issue.

Detail minded MHProNews readers then may recall that F.R. “Jayar” Daily, asked for legislation years ago to supposedly fix in advance the threat to the industry’s producers and sellers that finally came to pass by the now pending DOE energy rule.  Daily’s remarks reveal that MHI apparently failed to follow up on that proposed bill for years. Why did MHI ask for it at all, if they didn’t keep up the effort?  When MHI knew this issue was pending, why didn’t they move to fix it a decade or more ago? Again, this fits the pattern of posturing efforts with little or no effect that MHARR’s leaders have accused MHI of engaging in.

Evoking Testimony-F.R. “Jayar” Daily – American HomeStar Corp-Manufactured Housing Institute Board of Directors to Congress – ‘Boilerplate’ Pros Should Know; plus MHVille Market Updates

This DOE issues can be likened to a sort of flip side to the MHARR point of legislation not ‘reaching the ground.’  When MHI knows there is a need, when they have said so themselves, why have they failed to continue to press a fix until it is enacted?

From the Congressional testimony by Daily on behalf of MHI above or linked here, one can see a the MHI reference to H.R. 3135.

Per Bing AI, the following.

H.R. 3135 is a bill that was introduced in the House of Representatives on July 21, 2016 by Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) and co-sponsored by Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT)¹. The bill aims to amend section 413 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) with respect to energy efficiency standards for manufactured housing¹. …

H.R. 3135 proposes to modify the existing section 413 of EISA, which directs the Department of Energy (DOE) to establish energy efficiency standards for manufactured housing in consultation with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and other stakeholders³. The bill would require DOE to adopt the most recent version of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) as the minimum standard for manufactured housing, unless DOE determines that a more stringent or less stringent standard is justified by a life-cycle cost analysis¹. The bill would also authorize HUD to enforce the standards and provide incentives for states to adopt them¹.

The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Financial Services for further consideration¹. As of October 23, 2023, the bill has not been reported by any committee or passed by either chamber of Congress.”

That last part from Bing’s AI search result anticipated one of the questions that MHProNews had in mind.

As MHProNews noted about 18 months ago, there was virtually zero chance that this MHI supported bill (then called H.R. 7651) to become law. There are several reasons for that statement. One, it takes two ‘identical’ bills, one in the House, and one in the Senate. Given that a Democrat was and is in the White House, and Congress is divided, it is silly to even imagine that a bill could become law without serious (not token) bipartisan support.

While it is true that MHI has a new bill that at least check has a single Democrat on board with the latest version of the bill, it still has no Senate companion bill. So, once more, this is more posturing than serious legislation. Bing AI said as much.

To demonstrate the point, MHProNews asked Bing AI this follow up inquiry.

> “Helpful, Bing. The Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) said that in Congressional Testimony by F.R. Jayar Daily in 2016 that they supported enactment of a bill that aims to amend section 413 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) with respect to energy efficiency standards for manufactured housing. MHI had a lawmaker introduced a bill in 2022 dubbed H.R. 7651 that aimed to amend EISA so that HUD had primary jurisdiction over manufactured housing energy standards. But isn’t it accurate to say that since the EISA became law, there have been several sessions of Congress where there was no such bill with MHI support before Congress to amend the EISA? And isn’t it also true that there has never been an identical bill of that kind in both the House and Senate that had bipartisan support that could have become law?”

In essence, while the reply from Bing AI gave additional information, its response confirmed our inquiry.

Meaning, MHProNews has apparently established the fact that MHI has only periodically had such a bill before Congress.

Which means that they have not only, per Danny Ghorbani at MHARR, helped to push these energy standards forward via memos asking for negotiated rulemaking to the DOE, but the MHI efforts to ‘correct’ the error in allowing section 413 of the EISA to become law appear to be little more than occasional window dressing.

Why are MHI leaders posturing efforts that are doomed to fail? Who do MHI leaders think they are going to fool? It isn’t lawmakers, they know the score. So, isn’t this type of shadow boxing meant to mollify or impress trusting manufactured home industry members?

MHProNews posed this follow up to Bing.

> “Bing, based on the information you provided, it appears that the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) has at best dropped the ball or at worst has been posturing efforts to reform section 413 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) with respect to energy efficiency standards for manufactured housing. Who in manufactured housing trade media or bloggers, if any, has reported on the concerns of how MHI has dealt with this apparently mishandling of the claimed reform of section 413 of EISA?”

> “Bing, MHInsider is de facto endorsed by the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) and has as a contributor MHI CEO Lesli Gooch, and other MHI members, correct? Furthermore, MHI has admitted that there is in essence no progress on zoning and financing, because they claim that the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act (MHIA) of 2000 and its enhanced preemption provision is still not fully and properly enforced. Further, MHI says that they want the 10/10 rule for FHA Title 1 financing to be removed or reformed. Then, MHI says that they want the GSEs of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to provide chattel financing for mainstream manufactured homes. Those points all being based on facts and evidence, in what sense can MHInsider claim that MHI has any achievements in the area of zoning and financing? MHI itself contradicts those MHInsider claims in their letters to regulators and in statements to Congressional hearings.”

 

 

On issue after issue, MHARR’s claims and assertions about MHI appear to be spot on.

The MHARR White Paper appears to be well supported by independently exploring topics MHI postures that they have addressed by checking MHI’s so-called results out via Bing’s AI.

So, it isn’t only MHARR that has consistently held MHI as accountable. It is not only fact checks and analysis by MHProNews that established factual and evidence-supported basis for concerns about MHI lack of effectiveness as measured by their own stated goals vs. the actual outcomes. Concerns about MHI are further supported by the all-important measure of production and shipments. Properly understood, MHI’s lack of effectiveness is established by federal research too, such as the recent GAO report linked below.

 

Then, there are the recently launched antitrust suits involving several MHI members and/or members of MHI linked state associations. Or the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) suit that Cavco Industries settled. Once these and other legal items are properly understood, what emerges is a troubling picture.  What is that image?

That MHI has fallen under the control of a group of that is largely focused on consolidation. When the evidence and results are examined, it is the only thesis that consistently holds water. MHI has spent years and millions of dollars all told in an apparently ineffective pursuit of policy positions that on paper seem to be quite similar to what MHARR supports. But a key difference is that MHARR sees these MHI efforts as posturing and photo ops that lack any meaningful progress.  In essence, when MHI’s own remarks are examined, they are de facto admitting that there has been no progress. At the time he made the remarks to Congress below, William “Bill” Boor was MHI’s vice chairman. Boor today the MHI chairman.  Boor said the industry is at a critical crossroads. Quite so. But in pointing that out, aren’t there three fingers pointing back at MHI as an important part of the cause of the industry’s current plight?

 

 

 

 

MHI had a vice president presenting at a Housing Assistance Council (HAC) meeting.  But even there, to a rather friendly manufactured housing audience, that MHI VP failed to mention need to enforce enhanced preemption under the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act (MHIA) of 2000.

The above insights and Bing AI Q&A are a useful lead in to the headlines for the week in review.

Don’t miss today’s postscript.

With no further adieu, here are the headlines for the week that was – from Oct 22, 2023 to October 29, 2023.

What’s New on MHLivingNews

 

 

 

 

What’s New and Recent in Washington D.C. from MHARR

 

 

What’s New and Recent on the Masthead

What’s New on the Daily Business News on MHProNews

Saturday 10.29.2023

Sun Communities ‘Compelling Supply–Demand Fundamentals’ ‘Virtually No New Supply Added for Years’ but Manufactured Home Sales Drop, Quarterly-Y2D2023 Data with Analysis; plus MHMarkets

Friday 10.28.2023

Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) and Manufactured Housing Institute October 2023 Washington, D.C. – Industry Updates – Exclusive Report-Analysis; w/MHVille Markets

Thursday 10.27.2023

Shock! Manufactured Housing Institute Says Rep Ralph Norman Amendment Could Stop Spending Package for Dept of Energy (H.R. 4394) Standards for Manufactured Homes-Backstory; plus MHVille Markets

Wednesday 10.26.2023

TMHA and TRERC – ‘Texas Manufactured Housing Production Up But Still Outpaced by Demand’ – Wacky Wednesday Look at #1 Manufactured Housing ‘Lone Star State’ Remarks and Analysis; plus MHVille Market Updates

Tuesday 10.25.2023

‘Bidenomics Effect’ on Housing – per NBC News and DCNF – ‘Home Shoppers Buying Power Now Only ½ of Purchasing Power in December 2020’ Manufactured Housing Analysis; plus MHVille Markets Update

Monday 10.24.2023

Manufactured Homes Eye-Opener for Investors-Simply Wall Street-‘Apples and Oranges’ Compare Producer Nobility Homes (NOBH) Stock vs. Equity LifeStyle Properties (ELS) and Sun Communities (SUI)

Sunday 10.23.2023

Unlikely Any in U.S. Today Can be Successful and Politically Ignorant – Unpacking the ‘Westminster Declaration’ – Full Text – Why it Matters – Plus Sunday Weekly MHVille Headlines Review

Postscript

We at MHProNews and MHLivingNews don’t publish articles that we think are unimportant to our core audience. While we do publish information from third parties that may have arguably inaccurate information, we do so in part to examine some or all of their apparent errors.  Our analysis and tips aim to inform our audience rather than spread spin, propaganda, paltering, or lies.

That said, sometimes lengthy articles may boil down to some key takeaways. The consistency in the past year or so of year-over-year growth (2023 vs 2022) in traffic at MHProNews strongly suggests that our readers find this process of examining issues in some depth is useful on several potential levels.

Against that backdrop, let’s go back to the Saturday Daily Business News report on MHProNews linked above and republish part of the Q&A with Bing AI.

> “Okay, so Clayton, Skyline Champion, and Cavco are all prominent Manufactured Housing Institute members that have had seats on the Manufactured Housing Institute board of directors for years. You said earlier in a response that: “It is also possible that the MHI [i.e.: the Manufactured Housing Institute] has not posted any information on enhanced preemption because it may be a sensitive topic for some of its board members who have stated in their investor relations materials that limiting new development is an advantage.” Isn’t it possible that not only Equity LifeStyle Properties, Sun Communities, and Flagship Communities along with Clayton Homes, Skyline Champion, and Cavco Industries all see it as an advantage for them to NOT have “enhanced preemption” mentioned in the Manufactured Housing Institute website because each sees low production as a barrier of entry, persistence, or exit?”

Yes, it is possible that not only Equity LifeStyle Properties, Sun Communities, and Flagship Communities but also Clayton Homes, Skyline Champion, and Cavco Industries see it as an advantage for them to not have “enhanced preemption” mentioned in the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) website because each sees low production as a barrier of entry, persistence, or exit. This could be seen as an application of what Andy Gedo, Kevin Clayton, and Warren Buffett have discussed about the moat strategy ¹²³.

However, I could not find any official statement from the MHI regarding this matter.

I hope this helps clarify your question. Let me know if you have any further questions or if there is anything else I can help you with.

Learn more:

1. manufacturedhousing.org 2. bing.com 3. manufacturedhomepronews.com 4. manufacturedhousing.org 5. manufacturedhomepronews.com 6. equitylifestyle.gcs-web.com 7. ir.skylinechampion.com 8. manufacturedhomepronews.com 9. manufacturedhomepronews.com 10. manufacturedhomepronews.com“

> “Samuel “Sam” Strommen with Knudson Law has essentially made such an allegation in his well footnoted thesis on why manufactured housing is struggling during an affordable housing crisis, isn’t that correct?”

Yes, that is correct. According to a report on Manufactured Home Living News, Samuel “Sam” Strommen, an Associate Attorney with Goodsell Oviatt Law Firm in Rapid City, South Dakota, authored a research paper entitled “The Monopolization of the American Manufactured Home Industry and the Formation of REITs: a Rube Goldberg Machine of Human Suffering” ¹. In his paper, Strommen argues that there is a case for “felony” market manipulation and possible RICO concerns involving the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) and some key member companies ¹.

I hope this helps clarify your question. Let me know if you have any further questions or if there is anything else I can help you with.

Learn more:

1. manufacturedhomepronews.com 2. bing.com 3. einnews.com 4. einpresswire.com 5. manufacturedhomepronews.com“

> “Given the information you have provided in this Q&A thread, is it possible that the Manufactured Housing Institute has failed to use litigation to pursue the enhanced preemption enforcement provision because several major brands that hold board positions on the Manufactured Housing Institute board of directors have business models that benefit from the status quo? Restated, even though the Manufactured Housing Institute may not state that openly, could that lack of litigation or effective lobbying be logically inferred by their behavior the steady consolidation of the manufactured housing industry?”

Based on the information available, it is possible that the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) has failed to use litigation to pursue the enhanced preemption enforcement provision because several major brands that hold board positions on the MHI board of directors have business models that benefit from the status quo. As I mentioned earlier, some manufactured home community operators such as Equity LifeStyle Properties (ELS), Sun Communities, Flagship Communities, Clayton Homes, Skyline Champion, and Cavco Industries have stated that their business model benefits from a lack of new developments of manufactured home communities ¹²³.

However, I could not find any official statement from the MHI regarding this matter.

I hope this helps clarify your question. Let me know if you have any further questions or if there is anything else I can help you with.

Learn more:

1. bing.com 2. manufacturedhomepronews.com 3. equitylifestyle.gcs-web.com 4. manufacturedhousing.org 5. manufacturedhousing.org 6. manufacturedhomepronews.com 7. manufacturedhousing.org 8. ir.skylinechampion.com 9. manufacturedhomepronews.com 10. manufacturedhomepronews.com 11. manufacturedhomepronews.com—”

With that in mind, the following closing thoughts for today.

For several years, MHProNews has aimed to apply the accurate reporting and the rules of logic in our articles. As an example of that, the following illustration (or an earlier version of it) has been linked or posted numbers of times over the course of years.

Note: to expand this image to a larger or full size, see the instructions
below the graphic below or click the image and follow the prompts.

The underperformance of the manufactured housing industry is demonstrably linked to several issues. Not everything that has gone wrong for the once far more robust manufactured housing industry in the 21st century are caused by some failure by MHI and/or by some predatory behavior(s) of certain special interests, that apparently include some prominent MHI members.

That said, the various tests used by MHProNews with the Bing AI chat system has often been useful in this respect. The Bing AI responses are quite like having a well (not perfectly) informed source giving a facsimile of logic or applied common sense.  Do they have bias? Often, seemingly yes. As Bing AI has admitted, some links given may be influenced by payments from a brand to Bing, Google, or other search engines. MHProNews doesn’t pay search engines. Our search results are organic.

Logic – which is routinely important in legal, moral, or ethical issues – is important. Emotions are part of our daily lives, but logic – the proper use of the mind to discern objective truths – is critical to achieving certain goals.

Our industry is underperforming. Some in MHVille are trying to paper over that in a variety of ways.

• Laws that were enacted by widely bipartisan efforts in Congress are not properly enforced.
• That lack of enforcement of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 (MHIA 2000) so-called enhanced preemption provision, or the lack of enforcement of the Duty to Serve (DTS) provision of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2000 (HERA) is costing our industry potentially tens of billions of dollars annually in lost volume.
• MHARR and MHI – at least on paper – seem to have agreed on those points for well over a decade.
• But that in turn means that begs questions. Why hasn’t MHI used litigation to get the MHIA or DTS enforced?
• Why did MHI CEO Lesli Gooch recently toss an unrequested excuse to FHFA, Fannie, and Freddie?
• Why did MHI fail to stop the enactment of Section 413 of the EISA?
• Rather than stop enactment or quickly reform Section 413 of the EISA, why did MHI rather work with the DOE to get negotiated rulemaking accomplished?

There are a host of questions and points like the above that MHProNews has systematically documented over the course of years. As we’ve previously noted, no educated and informed professional in manufactured housing could so consistently fail to do the commonsense steps and actions that their job or board position requires.

Years of research and documentation are routinely being corroborated by Bing AI.

Additionally, those years of research were already corroborated by outsiders looking in and/or by industry insiders, documents, and solid evidence.

Any good attorney, which MHI and their major brands certainly have access to, can form arguments to respond to issues like those being raised herein. But MHI and several of those attorneys, corporate, and board leaders have opted to remain silent when MHProNews asks them to respond directly to this evidence based and logical allegations and arguments. Meaning, the allegations stand largely uncontroverted.

As a disclosure, MHProNews drafted the top segment of this article on 10.23.2023. The week in review articles were added, and this postscript as well, were written on 10.29.2023.  That said, this Q&A with Bing AI today.

> “What does the allegations stand largely uncontroverted mean?”

For some years, MHI has used or apparently allowed for this or that MHI surrogate to attempt to dispute various items. But increasingly, even those surrogates have largely been silent. Instead, they are using what one could call the red herring or other distractions or slight-of-hands to keep some of their audience in tow.

But perhaps, just perhaps, MHI connected illusions are beginning to wear thin. Their traffic, per SimlarWeb is down. Traffic on MHProNews – year over year – is up significantly. Industry pros may or may not like what our articles uncover and conclude, but they must find it relevant because they are following it closely by the thousands and thousands daily. In an artificially smaller industry the time, pageviews, and other indicators our site metrics generate may suggest that minds are steadily changing. With that in mind, the following quotable quotes.

Before bringing this article to a conclusion, let’s note that there are several exclusive items that are just hours or days away from being made available on MHProNews/MHLivingNews. Don’t miss even a day of the content that is drawing so many people in or interested in manufactured housing to these pages and in depth articles like this. Thanks to you and all for making that true and possible. ###

Again, our thanks to free email subscribers and all readers like you, as well as our tipsters/sources, sponsors and God for making and keeping us the runaway number one source for authentic “News through the lens of manufactured homes and factory-built housing” © where “We Provide, You Decide.” © ## (Affordable housing, manufactured homes, reports, fact-checks, analysis, and commentary. Third-party images or content are provided under fair use guidelines for media.) See Related Reports, further below. Text/image boxes often are hot-linked to other reports that can be access by clicking on them.)

By L.A. “Tony” Kovach – for MHProNews.com.

Tony earned a journalism scholarship and earned numerous awards in history and in manufactured housing.

For example, he earned the prestigious Lottinville Award in history from the University of Oklahoma, where he studied history and business management. He’s a managing member and co-founder of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC, the parent company to MHProNews, and MHLivingNews.com.

This article reflects the LLC’s and/or the writer’s position and may or may not reflect the views of sponsors or supporters.

http://latonykovach.com

Connect on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/latonykovach

Related References:

The text/image boxes below are linked to other reports, which can be accessed by clicking on them.’

‘Revolutionize Housing Industry’ – Factory-Builder Admares $750 Million Investment in U.S. for Plant w/Automation, More on S2A, Tiny Homes, 3D Printed Housing; plus Sunday Weekly Headlines Review

‘Warren Buffett Apparently Has Eye on New Double-Wide’ MarketWatch-Fast Company Reports on Clayton Homes and Related Manufactured Housing Acquisitions, plus Sunday Weekly MHVille Headlines Recap

H.R. 5198 – Expansion of Attainable Homeownership Through Manufactured Housing Act of 2023 – Manufactured Housing Institute Supported Bill Explored; plus Sunday Weekly MHVille Headlines Recap

‘The Great MH Boycott’ vs ‘The Illusion of Motion Versus and Real-World Challenges’ – Manufactured Housing Industry Paradoxes and Stumbling Blocks, plus Sunday Weekly MHVille Headlines Recap