Blog Posting # 838; Copyright 4 April 2025. EducateMHC
Know this! HUD-Code manufactured housing (‘MH’) is federally-regulated, performance-based, affordable-attainable, factory-built housing (a.k.a. offsite construction), complimentary to traditional stick-built housing (a.k.a. onsite construction). Plus, land lease communities (a.k.a. manufactured home communities & ‘mobile home parks’), comprise the commercial real estate (‘CRE’) component of MH. And, considering various types of housing finance (e.g. chattel or ‘home only’ loans & real estate-secured mortgages), describes post-production segment of MH.
EducateMHC is the official MH historian, trade term & trend tracker, as well as perennial MH information source. Contact EducateMHC Vis (317) 881-3815; email gfa7516@aol.com, and www.educatemhc.com, to purchase Community Management in the Manufactured Housing Industry (This book should be in land lease community offices nationwide!) and SWAN SONG – History of land lease communities & official record of annual MH productions since 1955.
And my autobiography, From SmittyAlpha6 to MHMaven, describes personal combat adventures in Vietnam as a USMC lieutenant, a 45 year entrepreneur business career in MH & community ownership, as well as freelance consulting and authoring of 30 nonfiction texts.
George Allen is the sole emeritus member of the Manufactured Housing Institute (‘MHI’), a founding board member of MHI’s National Communities Council (‘NCC’) division, RV/MH Hall of Fame enshrinee, Allen Legacy columnist and editor at large of MHInsider magazine.
Burning Bridges or Call for Unity & Better Advocacy?
You decide! Using a recent Press Release describing the meeting of “A delegation of officials from MHARR (and) HUD Secretary Scott Turner and senior HUD staff on March 25, 2025…” as impetus, here’s is a sincere challenge to our two national manufactured housing-related trade organizations (i.e. MHI & MHARR), to end their 40 years standoff (a.k.a. advocacy competition), unify, and far better represent all segments of our industry in Washington, DC!*1
This is not the first time, by any stretch of recollection; this challenge has been voiced by folk from within various segments of the manufactured housing industry. One might say said appeal has been routinely suggested-but-ignored since 1985, when MHARR spun off from MHI. So, what makes ‘today’ the right timing for unity and far better advocacy?
Some details from the aforementioned meeting between MHARR and HUD Secretary and senior staff.
Let’s begin with the title of the Press Release from MHARR, describing the MHARR/HUD meeting: MHARR ALIGNS MH INDUSTRY GOAL WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HUD SECRETARY TURNER’S AFFORDABLE HOMEOWNERSHIP VISION. Pretty impressive to read, but raises the question: ‘Who commissioned MHARR to represent (presumably all) manufactured housing in the important and timely matter of aligning industry and presidential housing-related goals?’ Yes, this is an important national matter, so what say in all this does MHI have? Moving on.
“The MHARR delegation included MHARR Chairman Peter James, MHARR Chairman Emeritus Edward J. Hussey, Jr., MHARR President and CEO Mark Weiss, and MHARR Founding President/Senior Advisor Danny D. Ghorbani.” At first glance, a team of heavy-hitters, but maybe not. So you know Peter James? I don’t, but he’s the elected leader of MHARR. And Mark Weiss is present day salaried leader of MHARR. The two remaining individuals? Possibly retired RV/MH Hall of Fame enshrines; ‘yesterday’s leaders’. So, why no senior executives of other MHARR member companies? Hardly expect James and Weiss to adequately represent the entire manufactured housing industry, even just the HUD-Code housing manufacturers.
And while this meeting did address several significant regulatory-related matters*2, the industry’s 25 year pause in housing production, due to lack of ready access to ‘home only’ loans for in-land lease community siting, received but passing mention.
What’s with the ‘burning bridges’ reference in the title of this week’s blog posting? Just the reality that if/when industry observers, sometimes even stakeholders, speak out about controversial industry issues (In this case, whether we should continue with one or two national trade entities); they are oft excoriated in the trade press and otherwise, by present day and erstwhile peers. Who knows. Maybe this time around, circumstances will prevail and the manufactured housing industry will see its’ national presence unified and empowered!
So, what do you think? Again, You decide! Is the manufactured housing industry better served, in Washington, DC. by two or one national trade advocacy group? Let me know via gfa7156@aol.com
End Notes.
- MHARR = Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform & MHI = Manufactured Housing Institute
- “…need to maintain reasonable and cost-effective regulation of MH”; “ongoing mismanagement of the HUD manufactured housing program”; “manipulation of appointments to the statutory Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee”; “monopoly on the monitoring contract by one entity…since the inception of the federal program”
STRUCTURAL BUILDING COMPONENTS ASSOCIATION
Have you ever heard of the Structural Building Components Association or SBCA? Didn’t think so. It’s a fairly recent trade association arrival on the national scene. Interestingly, the SBCA association appears to bridge the construction supply gap between onsite construction (i.e. traditional single-family residential housing construction) and offsite construction (e.g. manufactured housing, modular & panelized housing, and Park Model RVs).
In a recent issue of SBCA Magazine, a writer offers this sobering prescient observation about the contemporary housing construction workforce: “According to a Pew Research study, at least 15% of all construction workers are illegal immigrants and another 25% are in the U.S. with temporary status. In many parts of the country, these percentages are much higher. At the same time, the Associated Builders and contractors (‘ABC’) estimates the industry needs at least 450,000 new workers in 2025 to meet industry demand. This estimate presumes a slowing of construction spending which experts say is counter to what the industry is predicting. Deportation of illegal and temporary workers could be devastating to the construction industry. While the reduction in skilled workers could lead to more interest in offsite manufactured and prefabricated components, the lack of workers in the field could severely impact investment in construction and reduce the demand for our products.”
So, did you catch that? Possibly more demand for offsite construction in general, manufactured housing in particular, during year 2025. Let’s hope so!
George Allen