George Allen / EducateMHC Blog Mobile Home & Land Lease Community Advocate & Expert

May 25, 2022


Filed under: Uncategorized — George Allen @ 12:50 pm

Blog Posting # 691. Copyright @ 27 May 2022. EducateMHC

Perspective. ‘Land lease communities, previously manufactured home communities, and earlier, ‘mobile home parks’, comprise the real estate component of manufactured housing1’

EducateMHC is the online national advocate, realty asset class historian, trend spotter, education resource & textbook supplier for land lease communities throughout North America!

To input this blog and or connect with EducateMHC, telephone (317) 881-3815, email and or visit Previous phone #s no longer connected.

Motto: ‘U Support US & WE Serve U!’ Goal: to promote HUD-Code manufactured housing and land lease communities as U.S. # 1 source of affordable, attainable housing! Be MHM certified!

INTRODUCTION: A change in pace and topic this week. With all the talk about developing raw land into more land lease communities, the following two parts supply some of the advance planning guidance would be developers will need to be successful in their dealings with local housing market planning and zoning commissions, as well as convincing folk – investors and otherwise, to support their business dreams.



The April 2022 issue of LAND LINES, a quarterly magazine published by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, features an article by Loren Berlin, titled ‘On the Home Front’. In it, the author presents a “…four-part framework for a balanced and comprehensive housing strategy (that) groups individual policies into broader categories, so communities can assess where there are gaps in their local housing strategy and work to close them.” P.18

Given that there’s much conversation today about developing raw land into land lease communities designed to site HUD-Code manufactured housing, this local housing solutions policy framework needs as wide distribution and as much attention as possible. So here goes:

Part I. Create and Preserve Dedicated Affordable Housing Units. Accomplish this via

• Establishing incentives or requirements for affordable housing
• Generate revenue for affordable housing
• Support affordable housing through subsidies
• Preserve existing affordable housing
• Expand availability of affordable housing in resource-rich areas
• Create durable affordable homeownership opportunities
• Facilitate the acquisition or identification of land for affordable housing

Part II. Reduce Barriers to New Supply via

• Reduce development costs and barriers
• Create incentives for new development

Part III. Help Households Access and Afford Private market Homes by

• Providing tenant-based rental assistance
• Promoting mobility for housing choice voucher holders
• Reducing energy use and costs
• Combatting housing discrimination

Part IV. Protect Against Displacement and Poor Housing Conditions

• Enhance renters’ housing stability
• Enhance homeowners’ housing stability
• Improve quality of both new and existing housing
• Ensure Ongoing viability of unsubsidized affordable rental properties

With this said, what are the actual resources available to would be developers of new land lease communities (a.k.a. manufactured home communities, and earlier, ‘mobile home parks’)? Well they’re ‘far and few’ these days, but here’s where to begin:

‘Development, Marketing & Operation of Manufactured Home Communities’ was published by J. Wiley & Sons in 1994, and again in 1996, it was that popular at the time. It’s long out of print, but used copies are available online – and most of the principles espoused continue to be valid. The co-authors, George Allen & Edward Hicks are retired, and David Alley is deceased. Frankly, this is the largest unmet educational need in the manufactured housing industry today! Surely today’s developers can improve on this 26 year old data.

The Manufactured Housing Institute (‘MHI’) continues to plan and host annual seminars on ‘developing with manufactured housing’. However, the longtime instructors, Don Westphal and Roderick Knoll are both approaching retirement; so there too is a dire need for contemporary information and guidance relative to land lease community development.

In my opinion, the manufactured housing industry in general, has never demonstrated strong support, if any support at all, for individuals – usually capable, experienced freelance consultants, to spend time and resources preparing manuscripts teaching housing practitioners how to effectively and correctly develop raw land into land lease communities. And until this attitude changes, the industry will be constrained by its’ lack of knowledge and acumen on this timely and critical topic.


OK, so now there’s a policy framework in place for a local housing solution that allows for raw land development into a land lease community. What’s next, if not already underway? A Business Plan; one that serves as a coordinated and collaborative exercise of planning for everyone involved, as a tool for gaining external funding for said project, and a continuing reference source to guide future efforts and actions of the organization involved in the development.

Business Plans typically answer a number of standard questions, e.g.:

• Who is involved in the project?
• What is the nature of the opportunity or organizational advantage of the project?
• What contextual factors will affect the development process from start to finish?
• Are there inter-organizational relationships that strengthen the proposed plan?
• What decisions have been made to increase the probability of project success?

The 13 basic components of a comprehensive Business Plan*1, e.g.

• Title Page
• Executive Summary of the Business Plan
• Table of Contents
• Program/Initiative Descriptions
• Analysis of Organizational Context
• Marketing/Promotion Plan*2
• Operational Aspects
• Management/Administration
• Organization and Personnel Involved
• Funds Required and Their Planned Use
• Financial Projections
• Business Controls
• Appendices

There more than can be added to this list, as need be, e.g. project timeline, sources of information and data, descriptive charts and graphs, etc…

End Notes:

1. This information culled from Training magazine, 2010.
2. Six Right Ps of Marketing relative to land lease community home sales and rental homesite leasing: Right product re: homes and homesites; right place (location); right price*3; right promotion per USP (Unique Selling Proposition); right people trained and supervised; and right process proper (of implementing and monitoring performance from start to finish).
3. To properly price new and resale homes in land lease communities and on scattered homesites conveyed fee simple, use the ‘Ah Ha! & Uh Oh! Worksheet’ relative to AGI (annual gross income) and AMI (area median income). Visit

George Allen, CPM, MHM

May 19, 2022


Filed under: Uncategorized — George Allen @ 7:35 am

Blog Posting # 690. Copyright @ 20 May 2022. EducateMHC

Perspective. ‘Land lease communities, previously manufactured home communities, and earlier, ‘mobile home parks’, comprise the real estate component of manufactured housing!’

EducateMHC is the online national advocate, realty asset class historian, trend spotter, education resource & textbook supplier for land lease communities throughout North America!

To input this blog and or connect with EducateMHC, telephone (3170 881-3815, email and or visit Previous phone #s no longer connected.

Motto: ‘U Support US & WE Serve U!’ Goal: to promote HUD-Code manufactured housing and land lease communities as U.S. # 1 source of affordable, attainable housing! Be MHM certified!

INTRODUCTION: OK, time is passing by, and to date no one has stepped forward to organize and launch an independent third party entity to better represent and advocate for post-production sector firms of the manufactured housing industry. Part I is a summary of what’s been going on, and not going on, to date. Part II introduces blog floggers (readers) to a training resource designed and intended to improve sales and customer service in the private business sector.



‘Put Up or Shut Up!’ entered our industry’s vernacular (‘language of a group’) a month ago; once and for all – or not, encouraging someone (e.g. as would be leader or existent organization) to step forward to lead a national movement to ensure better representation and advocacy for what is generally referred to as post-production sectors of the manufactured housing industry (i.e. land lease communities, realty and housing finance, and more). Well, there’s been quite a bit said and written about this matter prior to and during the past five weeks – but as yet, no plans announced or definitive action taken to this end! Hence the need for a deadline, a ‘line in the sand’, to organize and move forward, OR, stop complaining about the sorry matter altogether!

One proposed deadline is 16 August 2022, the day following the 15 August RV/MH Hall of Fame Induction Banquet in Elkhart, IN. Since 500+ pioneers and leading executives of the manufactured housing industry will attend this gala event, why not stay over the night and spend the 16th crossing that ‘line in the sand’ to better representation and advocacy of our industry and post-production segments thereof? To a critic who believes this discussion and organizing effort can be effected via Zoom or like calls, I disagree. For this effort to succeed, it must be face-to-face among participants with ‘skin in the game’ (i.e. travel-related expenses).

As a reminder, here’s what we know to date. This challenge is real! More than 50,000 land lease communities nationwide, including 500+/- portfolio owners/operators of the unique property type, and dozens of lenders (i.e. home-only and real estate mortgage originators), have little to no ‘say’ within the HUD-Code manufacturer-dominated national trade entity headquartered in Alexandria, VA. And yes, there’s a National Communities Council (‘NCC’) division component within said body, but few members show up for meetings where there is no proxy voting, where resort meeting locations give rise to affluence gerrymandering (i.e. only biggest firms can afford to send high-salaried executives), and sole proprietors are the exception rather than the rule.*1 And finance firms? They’re as rare as hens teeth.*2

So, what needs to be done? Well, there are two directions in which this matter can go:

A reprioritization of mission and tasks at the Manufactured Housing Institute (‘MHI’), including a total recommitment of the NCC to serve all sizes of land lease communities nationwide! This means the HUD-Code housing manufacturer division majority will likely have to cede power to post-production sectors of the industry. Will this happen? Watch to see if there’re public announcements to this effect, by MHI, between now and 16 August 2022. But don’t hold your breath while waiting. Reprioritization would change decades of precedence, and call for power-sharing at the highest level in our industry.

Five organizing alternatives. Could be more, but these are ones that come readily to mind:

• North American Manufactured Housing Community Owners (‘NAMHCO’) headquartered in Arizona. Sorry, but this is a non-starter, as it is presently an inactive organization.

• Southeast Community Owners (‘SECO’), headquartered in Atlanta, GA. Already the realty asset class’ best representative and advocate to date, by dint of 10 years of convenings of land lease community owners/operators, and other post-production sector businesses, for mostly educational purposes.

• An online trade newsletter purporting to represent the entire manufactured housing industry. When asked why I don’t identify this entity by name, the reason is simple: Almost every time I respond to its’ published material, I am belittled and disparaged. For me, life is too short to subject oneself to pompous and immature blather.*3

• Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (‘MHARR’). Ever since the National Manufactured Housing Federation (‘NMHF’) was absorbed by MHI during the early 1990s, MHARR has advocated for the formation of an independent national post-production trade association. This posture was underscored upon passage of the Year 2000 MH Improvement Act, and again, upon passage of the Duty to Serve (‘DTS’) mandate. Why? Two perennial post-production challenges/opportunities: consumer financing issues and discriminatory/exclusionary zoning laws. But here’s ‘the rub’: MHARR is a ‘production’ association and does not receive, or desire, funding from postproduction companies and land lease communities – so is apparently uninterested in actively leading the launch of a post-production sectors organization. Again, let’s ‘wait & see’ what happens, relative to MHARR, between now and 16 August 2022.

• Unnamed, but like-minded individual(s) to step forward as organizers and leaders. Believe it or not, this is from where I think present or future leadership will come. Someone with passion for the industry, realty asset class, and finance; possessing personal or corporate resources to underwrite early efforts to organize and launch an entity; and, the chutzpa (‘effrontery’) to step out and lead – probably in the face of tacit opposition, long-entrenched status quo, and diversity among sectors.

So, where do we go from here? That wholly depends on how lively and pervasive an industry issue this is, for post-production sectors of the manufactured housing industry to enjoy, for the first time in our collective history, representation and advocacy at least equal to that of financially-controlling HUD-Code housing manufacturers in power today.

Bottom line! If this issue is indeed ‘to be addressed’, then someone step forward before 16 August 2022, and call for a national organizing effort (i.e. if MHI does not, beforehand, commit to reprioritization of their mission and tasks). Matters little to me – and others, whether said effort occurs at the RV/MH Hall of Fame, as that’s a suggestion of time and location convenience. However, if such an historic recoursing of our industry is to occur, it probably should be in-person yet this year.*4

Otherwise, if 16 August 2022 arrives, with no acclamation to this end, or a planning meeting in place (i.e. ‘Put up!’); let’s by all means, ‘Shut Up!’ once and for all about post-production sector’s need for representation and advocacy! Yes, it’s needed, but now may not be the right time. So, let’s see what happens between now and 16 August 2022.*5

End Notes.

1. To these three shortfalls add ‘lack of products and services’, e.g. no annual directory of 500+/- portfolio ‘players’ and their benchmark statistics (i.e. occupancy, OERs, etc.); official directory or lexicon of MH and LLCommunity trade terms; directories of product and service suppliers, including freelance consultants; and, directory of HUD-Code housing manufacturers nationwide.

2. To date, no successor to the 23rd annual National Registry of ALL Lenders, including real estate-secured mortgages, and originators of home-only loans.

3. Quoting from most recent email communique from said online newsletter publisher: “…our audience dwarfs yours and all others who publish trade news….” & “I think what you’ve written is hilarious.”

4. To contact the RV/MH Hall of Fame, phone (574) 293-2344

5. The question is sometimes asked, ‘Why don’t I, as I did on 31 August 1993, organize and host another national planning meeting?’ Well, back then there was no effective national interest in (then) manufactured home community advocacy, so the effort to launch – what eventually became the aforementioned NCC division, was wholly successful! However, due to shortcomings just cited, after the first couple years – in my opinion – the NCC never achieved the heady goals 19 community owners set for it nearly 30 years ago. For more on this subject, read the late Bruce Savage’s ‘The First 20 Years’, a book available via In the meantime, now mostly retired, I no longer have the business resources (i.e. money) to finance such an effort; and frankly, after 40+ years in this business, it’s someone else’s turn to lead. GFA



Everybody has a business management, or sales success formula – or formulae, they live and work by, from day to day. Some cite the Golden Rule (‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you!’), others the Gold Rule (‘He who has the gold rules!’). Me? Many during my career, but recently, the Six Right Ps of Marketing: ‘Right Product, Place, Price, Promotion, People & Promotion!’*1

Well, a longtime business acquaintance (friend) of mine, Nancy Friedman, a.k.a. The Telephone Doctor, has been teaching business communication and client relationships for decades. She recently sent me her Six Cardinal Rules of Customer Service. They’re Keepers, all six of them! Nancy has given me permission to share them with you in this unabridged fashion:

Cardinal Rule # 1. People Before Paperwork
‘When someone walks into your place of business, or calls you while you’re working on something, drop everything for that person. Remember, paper can wait, people should not.’ To which I’d add: You rarely get a second chance to make a good first impression!

Cardinal Rule # 2. Rushing Threatens Customers
‘Sure, you may understand something quick, but rushing the customer along will only lead to them feeling intimidated. Remember, speed is not success! Take your time with each contact.’ And SMILE! A pundit once said: ‘I’d rather see a fake smile than a genuine frown.’

Cardinal Rule # 3. Company Jargon
‘Ever get a report from a company and not understand it? Some companies have jargon that makes the CIA envious. Be very careful not to use company jargon on your customers. You and your employees may understand it, but the customer may not. And you’ll only cause lots of unnecessary confusion.’ That’s why we say ‘manufactured housing’ and not something less appealing or image demeaning.

Cardinal Rule # 4. Don’t Be Too Busy To Be Nice
‘Hey, everyone’s busy! That’s what it’s all about. Being busy does not give you carte blanche to be rude. Remember, you meet the same people coming down, as you do going up.’ And NOT being busy is worse than being busy, so don’t do be rude and risk becoming inactive.

Cardinal Rule # 5. “Uh huh’ is not ‘Thank You’ & ‘There ya go’ is not ‘You’re Welcome!’
‘Remember, ‘Thank You’ and ‘You’re Welcome’ are beautiful words. The customer cannot hear them too often. And, if you’re telling your customers to ‘have a nice day’, say it with meaning and make eye contact! I recently had a checkout clerk tell the FLOOR to have a nice day.’

Cardinal Rule # 6. Be Friendly BEFORE You Know Who It is
‘The Telephone Doctor motto is: Smile BEFORE you know who it is. The customer needs to know you want to work with them, no matter who they are. Often, it’s way too late to smile and be friendly after you know who it is.’ And as I’ve heard Nancy say before: ‘Smile, it might be the boss calling!’

As you can see, I’ve added the word SALES to the title. Every one of these six cardinal rules apply to those of us who sell new and resale manufactured homes and are involved in leasing vacant rental homesites in land lease communities. I hope the Manufactured Housing Institute sees the wisdom in featuring The Telephone Doctor at a future MHCongress. In the meantime, if you’d like to engage Nancy to address your sales, leasing, management, customer staff, reach her via (314) 276-1012. And tell her ‘George sent me!’ Not really, but it’d be nice. GFA

End Note.

1. One of my all time favorite quotes is this from Proverbs 24: 3&4, the Living Bible: “Any enterprise is built by wise planning, becomes strong through common sense, and profits wonderfully by keeping abreast of the facts.”

George Allen, CPM, MHM

May 13, 2022


Filed under: Uncategorized — George Allen @ 7:03 am

Blog Posting # 689. Copyright @ 13 May 2022. EducateMHC

Perspective. ‘Land lease communities, previously manufactured home communities, and earlier, ‘mobile home parks’, comprise the real estate component of manufactured housing!”

EducateMHC is the online national advocate, realty asset class historian, trend spotter, education resource & textbook supplier for land lese communities throughout North America!

To input this blog and or connect with EducateMHC, telephone (317) 881-3815, email and or visit Previous phone #s no longer connected.

Motto: ‘U Support US & WE Serve U!’ Goal: to promote HUD-Code manufactured housing and land lease communities as U.S. # 1 source of affordable, attainable housing! Be MHM certified!

INTRODUCTION: This is one of the most heterogeneous blogs I’ve penned to date. Part I = What every land lease community owner/operator should know about setting competitive rental homesite rates. Part II = Return of an event in Washington, D.C. you should consider attending! Part III = Clear contrast of views espoused by MHI & MHARR re: FHFA & two GSEs’ DTS plans.
Part IV = Tiptoeing along the precipice of partisan politics and legacy or ‘fake’ news coverage.



Once and for all, here’s how ‘it’ works! What’s ‘it’? The traditional Rule of Thumb*1 for estimating rental homesite rates in land lease communities in any local housing market.

Goes like this. Ascertain the average monthly rental rate of three bedroom, two bath conventional apartments in a given local housing market; then divide that $ amount by three. For example, in the April 2022 issue of MULTIFAMILY EXECUTIVE magazine, Yardi Matrix is cites the ‘average U.S. (conventional apartment) asking rent’ in February 2022 as $1628.00/month. Dividing that $ figure by three, suggests average national land lease community monthly rental homesite rate is around $540.00. However, that estimate will be much higher in some local housing markets, much lower in others; but that’s how to start the process.

And a recent Rule of Thumb faux adjustment, foisted on our unique, income-producing property type (i.e. land lease communities, a.k.a. manufactured home communities; and earlier, ‘mobile home parks’) by – in my opinion – predatory investors, would have the divisor, in the previous paragraph, changed from three to two, raising the rental homesite rate estimate from $540 to $814/month. Now that’s a heady topic for another blog posting.

Other Rules of Thumb germane (‘relative’) to the unique realty asset class?

Average national operating expense ratio (‘OER’) is widely accepted as being 40 percent. And, as a general rule; the greater the number of occupied and paying rental homesites in a land lease community, the lower the OER; and the lower the number of rental homesites, the higher the OER. 40 percent includes all property operating expenses, not including debt service.

The New Rule of 72. Give an ‘average’ land lease community (‘whatever that is’*2), perform two similar calculations: # rentable homesites X average monthly site rent rate X 72 = estimated income value of the property if/when all rental homesites are occupied and paying rent. For example: 200 sites X $500/month X 72 = $7,200,000. Again, an ‘average’ community with no management-owned homes, and what it could well be worth when full. The second calculation involves the actual number of rental homesites occupied and paid current; e.g. 180 sites X $500/month X 72 = $6,480,000., or $720,000. less than potential income value of the property. The replacement or income value of ‘park-owned homes’ is calculated separately and added in, with explanation.

End Notes.

1. This was one of several property management Rules of Thumb I was taught when entering this business in the late 1970s. Some disagree, but in the end it prevails.

2. Land lease community quality assessment continues to be a perennial bugaboo of manufactured housing. Today (2022), there is NO approved or accepted grading system for land lease communities! The Woodall Star System has been defunct since the late 1970s. And the ABClassification System, proposed to, but rejected by the National Communities Council (‘NCC’) division during the late 1990s, while existent and used by some, is no longer readily available to owners/operators of this property type.



Hosted by HUD & NAHB, ‘Homes on the Hill’ returns to Washington, D.C. from June 7 – 12, 2022. Manufactured Housing Institute will be staging three HUD-Code homes on the National Mall, and will host a reception with policymakers on June 8th. For details, email:

I attended the first such event (before the pandemic) and found it to be a very worthwhile experience – and may attend this time around. It was educational to see the variety of innovative housing designs and structures on display during this six day event, and to talk firsthand with legislators and housing professional from throughout the U.S. Attend and be part of MH industry history!



The Federal Housing Finance Agency ‘FHFA’) has approved 2022-2024 Duty to Serve (‘DTS’) Plans for GSEs Fannie Mae & Freddie Mack, for three underserved markets – including manufactured housing.

Here is where this matter becomes INTERESTING. Specifically, in comparing how the Manufactured Housing Institute (‘MHI’) and Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (‘MHARR’) industry advocates view what many of us consider to be GSEs’ ongoing ‘benign neglect’ of financing and other needs of HUD-Code manufactured housing, particularly relative to land lease communities.*1

This is MHI’s ‘take’ on this matter.*2 “The revised Plans incorporate recommendations from MHI including increasing the volume of land-home financing targets. Further, Freddie Mac’s DTS Plan calls for creation of a personal property (chattel) loan financing product by 2024. (Fannie Mae’s Plan is silent on chattel). While MHI is pleased with these changes, given that approximately 845 of all new single family homes under $200,000 are manufactured homes, more action by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is still needed.”

This is MHARR’s ‘take’ on this matter.*3 “…the Fannie Mae plan contains no provision whatsoever for securitization or secondary market support for the personal property (chattel) loans that comprise nearly 80% of the mainstream, affordable manufactured housing consumer financing market.” And “The Freddie Mac plan…offers the possibility of a meager 1500 to 2500 chattel loan purchases for ‘study’ purposes in the plan’s final year – some 16 years following Congress’ enactment of DTS.”*4 MHARR goes on to observe that this exclusion of chattel loans from DTS by the GSEs confirms: 1) neither Enterprise has any interest in serving…the vast majority of affordable, mainstream manufactured housing; & 3) representation of industry’s post-production sector has been ineffective…in pressing for full and robust compliance” (in this matter).*5

So, do you pick up on the undercurrent of ‘reluctant participation’ on the part of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac in matters ‘manufactured housing’? Once again, as an industry, we are dead in the water, until we identify a charismatic leader capable of leading, empower the post-production sector of manufactured housing, and make our financial needs and affordable housing message heard!

End Note.

1. ‘Benign neglect’? Simply, an attitude or policy intended to benefit someone or something less than continual attention would!

2. Quoted from MHI’s News & Updates dated April 27, 2022.

3. Quoted from MHARR’s Press Release dated 28 April 2022.

4. “As consumers and industry members know all too well…there is absolutely no guarantee that even this minimal level of purchase activity will actually occur, as similar ‘pilot’ type proposals contained in the Enterprises’ FHFA-approved 2017-2021 DTS plans were promptly jettisoned by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in subsequent amendments.” Suggest you read that expose’ statement again!

5. This may be direct reference to blog postings in recent weeks (i.e. ‘Put Up or Shut Up!’), calling for renewed attention by MHI to the post-production sector of the industry, OR, a widespread call to form a new national trade advocacy entity to better represent the legislative and regulatory needs of the post-production sector in Washington, D.C.



Every once in a (long) while, something pops up (is published) that goes beyond the norm of day to day news reporting, reading and watching. This happened, for me, in an Editor’s Picks press release, on 28 April, from the Columbia Journalism Review (‘CJR’), announcing the change in executive editors at the New York Times. Here’s what CJR’s editor had to say about the newspaper:

“The residue of the Trump years, and fears that the former president will return for another campaign, have put the Times in the bull’s-eye of the journalistic debates over objectivity and both-sides coverage, which have led many legacy news operations to wonder whether traditional approaches to journalism apply at a time of high concern for the fate of American democracy.”

Whoa! Wouldn’t it be helpful to state the nature of alleged threat(s) to American democracy? Or is this a default position simply related to Trump returning for another term? And since when – in my opinion – has The New York Times and other legacy news operations aligned with traditional approaches to journalism?

The press release goes on to describe the Times’ posture towards independence (‘whatever that is?)’: “I (Joe Kahn, new Times’ editor) honestly think if we become a partisan organization exclusively focused on threats to democracy, and we give up our coverage of the issues, the social, political, and cultural divides that are animating participation in politics in America, we will lose the battle to be independent.”

Whoa again! I think many U.S. citizens already view the Times’ as a partisan news organization, NOT covering issues, the social, political, and cultural divides in place today, having already lost the battle to be truly independent (of political partisanship). But hey, that’s simply my opinion based on what I read and don’t read about in that newspaper; e.g. illegal immigration along the U.S. southern border, true cause of rampant inflation, content of Hunter Biden’s laptop computer and his family’s Chinese business dealings, and on and on.

George Allen

May 6, 2022


Filed under: Uncategorized — George Allen @ 1:34 pm

Blog Posting # 688. Copyright @ 6 May 2022. EducateMHC

Perspective. ‘Land lease communities, previously manufactured home communities, and earlier, ‘mobile home parks’, comprise the real estate component of manufactured housing!’

EducateMHC is the online national advocate, realty asset class historian, trend spotter, education resource & textbook supplier for land lease communities throughout North America!

To input this blog and or connect with EducateMHC, telephone (317) 881-3815, email and or visit Previous phone #s no longer connected.

Motto: ‘U Support US & WE Serve U!’ Goal: to promote HUD-Code manufactured housing and land lease communities as U.S. # 1 source of affordable, attainable housing! Be MHM certified!

INTRODUCTION: Parts I & II are intended to be read sequentially. Bottom line? We continue to await word from someone at MHARR, and or online trade newsletter publisher, about hosting a an organization planning meeting for post-production segments of the manufactured housing industry. Part II? The first considered response, on this subject, from a like-minded businessman. And Part III? Maybe a Credit Risk Transfer (‘CRT’) ‘light at the end of the home-only finance tunnel’. The folk at MHI & MHARR have been provided copies of this brief.



We are now into a new month, the month of MAY. This is a scant three months before the celebratory event of the year, and possibly, a watershed moment (‘a dividing or transitional point’) for the manufactured housing industry – especially finance firms and land lease communities coast to coast.

The celebratory event? The RV/MH Heritage Foundation’s annual Hall of Fame induction banquet at the event hall, museum and library in Elkhart, IN. the evening of 15 August 2022.
For banquet tickets, phone (574) 294-2344. I plan to attend; hope you do as well!

The watershed moment? Could be and should be, when entrepreneurial businessmen and women in the HUD-Code housing manufacturing industry; especially finance firms and land lease communities, convene to encourage the Manufactured Housing Institute (‘MHI’) to become markedly more inclusive, and aggressively advocate, in behalf of all post-production sectors of the industry; OR, not be surprised when others take steps to birth a new national trade body that will do so! To that end, MHARR, an online trade newsletter publisher, and like-minded individuals need to, once and for all, move ahead in this fashion – as they’ve ‘threatened’, or ‘forever hold their peace’.

To this latter end, we received a position paper from Paul F. Martens, ACM, MHM, and portfolio land lease community owner/operator, headquartered in California. Part II, here following, is Paul’s view on this timely topic, lightly edited. As you read it, ask yourself: ‘If and when will we receive a similar communique from MHARR, the online publisher, and like-minded individuals?



“A new national association? To be, or not to be! To that end, the elephant in the room is NIMBY (i.e. ‘Not in My Back Yard’), and how do we as an industry eliminate that perennial roadblock?*1 The solution begins with this question, ‘Who are ‘we’ as an industry?’ The Manufactured Housing Institute (‘MHI’), of which I am a direct, dues-paying member, is our industry’s national leader, and their important contributions to our industry are focused on macro level lobbying in Washington, DC. and trade education, nationwide. MHI’s National Communities Council (‘NCC’) division, an important extension of the institute, was created to provide a platform for the real estate sector of the industry.*2 And for a brief period of time, as the first real estate investment trusts (‘REITs’) were launched, circa 1994-2000, this was the case – until more institutional investors became involved, eventually dominating the council. This is not necessarily a negative, but it has changed the original intent of NCC founders, and created a leadership void; and leaving many asset class insiders feeling marginalized, standing on the outside looking in.

So, where are we as an industry? We are small to mid-sized community owners/operators, the 99 percent not yet institutionalized, as well as a variety of business service providers that support the manufactured housing industry. We are a group without a voice, because MHI and the NCC, while important to our industry, have agendas not focused on our needs! Herein the timely conundrum, as George Allen succinctly states, now is the time and opportunity to either ‘Put up or shut up!’ – but what does that mean?

I very reluctantly suggest – as have others before me – that we create another new national trade association to represent and advocate for the disfranchised of our industry. Individually, we do not have the clout or funds to move the needle. It takes commitment by the majority of people reading this – and more. It requires a plan. It requires compromise. And most importantly, it requires funds. We are not starting by asking for money, but rather, boots-on-the-ground to create a framework for how an ideal national association, representing and advocating for this majority body, might look. We welcome input and support from MHI and the NCC, but the board of a newly formed association should consist of elected small to mid-sized community owners/operators and other post-production sector representatives – none of whom will individually, or in cliques, control the new entity. Think Elon Musk trying to buy Twitter.

It’s easy to say, ‘I’m in!’ However, consider the time commitment carefully, as it will take work to make this a reality. Two related examples: 1) an early initiative of this newly formed body might be creation of a minimum set of performance standards for land lease communities (a.k.a. manufactured home communities) nationwide, to ensure consistent levels of quality among communities, using something measurable, such as one of the existent rating systems. Doing this begins the process of negating the NIMBY syndrome. 2) The next step might be to ensure all states support implementation of licensing or regulations to enforce aforementioned minimal standards of performance and quality, holding investor owners and their property managers accountable. And, of course, there are other measures appropriate to address the needs of other post-production sectors. In any case, if the majority of our industry is willing to compromise and agree to some sacrifices, we can change the image and ensure future growth of our industry!

However, if creating a new entity is asking too much, what would you suggest that would give the 99 percent of our industry the visibility it currently lacks?

It is much easier putting this call-to-action into words than it will be getting the majority of your support, but we can make this a reality if you are up for the challenge. I will commit the time, if many of you newer and seasoned industry insiders will commit as well. Furthermore; given the chance this call–to-action succeeds, we have already secured/parked a couple URLs for consideration, being:’ manufactured home community owners association of America’ (‘MHCOAA’). org or .com.*3

End Notes.

1. NIMBY is just one of several ‘affordable housing progress negating epithets’ in use these days; others include: LULU = ‘locally unwanted land use’, & BANANA = ‘build absolutely nothing anywhere near anyone.’ For more information on this subject read SWAN SONG, a history of the land lease communities, available from

2. For a history of the formation of the NCC division, read the late Bruce Savage’s ‘The First 20 Years’, also available from

3. If the entire spectrum of post-production sectors of the manufactured housing industry are likely to be represented in a new national trade body, more URLs and other identifying names and symbols will be needed.

Editor’s Note.

Do you realize what you just read in Part II? There’s a dozen or more businessmen and women who’ve expressed interest in or support of this proposal – to at least meet and consider/plan the creation of a new post-production trade body; or, demand the rejuvenation of MHI and its’ NCC division, to better represent and advocate for ‘all’ of us! (By the way, it took only 19 land lease community owners, meeting on 31 August 1993, to get the NCC started.) So far, today’s individuals hail from east and west coasts, as well as the Midwest. All we’re waiting for now, is for MHARR (‘Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform), an online trade newsletter publisher, and like-minded individuals (‘You?’) to step forward and lead….GFA



David M. Brickman, writing for the URBAN Institute, during early April, penned a report titled: ‘Credit Risk Transfers as a Catalyst for Affordable Housing Initiatives’. His first sentence sets the stage for what follows: “This brief explains how credit risk transfers (‘CRT’) have historically been used, and argues for a more expansive approach to promoting affordable housing.”

Two things caught my attention. First, this challenge to Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac: Leverage “existing and potential suite of credit risk transfer (‘CRT’) tools and capabilities, the government-sponsored enterprises (‘GSEs’) can boldly address the acute barriers to affordable and equitable homeownership.” Then, within the report proper, the author provides ‘examples of how a CRT could encourage loans for manufactured and multifamily housing.’

Then, in no fewer than seven lengthy paragraphs, Brickman describes, in detail, how CRT applies to this unique, eminently affordable, housing type. And within one of those paragraphs, he provides this clear indictment of how ‘finance’ operates in the manufactured housing industry today: “…nonbank lenders are gaining market share as banks have decreased their activity or left the market altogether over the past decade. The result is a market that lacks both the liquidity and completion necessary to bring down interest rates for borrowers, especially among those who rely on chattel loans.”

Brickman’s recommended solution to this dilemma? “The GSEs could leverage the activities of existing lenders and investors through (a) more expansive and ‘proactive’ view of CRT. Specifically, the GSEs could work with existing lenders to develop a standardized product for manufactured housing chattel loans, including a single set of loan terms and documents, credit parameters, and delivery mechanics, which would create significant value and bring helpful liquidity to an otherwise fragmented market.” And his recommendations continue on….

The report concludes with a very interesting, even exciting, ‘Theoretical CRT for the Manufactured Housing Sector’. To read this, obtain your own copy of this brief from the Urban Institute (, the Housing finance Policy Center (‘HFPC’) or via

George Allen, CPM, MHM

Powered by WordPress