In 2004, the AARP’s Public Policy Institute (PPI) and the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) collaborated to develop a model state statute aimed at protecting residents of manufactured housing communities. Their joint publication, Manufactured Housing Community Tenants: Shifting the Balance of Power, laid out essential legal reforms to address the substantial power imbalances between tenants and community owners.¹
Despite the passage of more than two decades, the core concerns and proposed remedies remain alarmingly relevant today. This continued relevance does not reflect a lack of clarity or foresight in the original proposals. Instead, it highlights the effectiveness with which these issues have been suppressed or ignored due to persistent and coordinated industry opposition.
Opposition to tenant protections has been led by a coalition of industry actors whose financial interests are threatened by meaningful reform. Mobile Home University (MHU)—a private training company for mobile home park investors—openly encourages landlords to capitalize on resident vulnerability, acknowledging that mobile homes are often too costly to move, effectively trapping tenants in place. Investors are advised to raise rents aggressively, limit maintenance expenditures, and avoid regulatory entanglements.² These tactics thrive in jurisdictions like New Mexico that have minimal tenant protections and low regulatory enforcement.
The Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI), the national trade association for the industry, plays a central role in lobbying against reforms at the federal and state levels. MHI routinely opposes legislation that would institute rent stabilization, require just-cause evictions, or mandate health and safety upgrades in manufactured housing communities.
“In New Mexico, MHI partnered with community owners to stop proposed legislation during this legislative cycle.” This was posted by MHI on their website on April 7, 2025 as they were taking a bow after our bills failed. https://www.manufacturedhousing.org/news/mhi-helps-defend-land-lease-communities-in-state-legislatures-across-the-country/
MHI is highly influential and argues that such measures would stifle investment and reduce affordability.³ In practice, however, their efforts serve to maintain the profit margins of large corporate owners at the expense of tenant stability and long-term community health.
At the state level, the New Mexico Manufactured Housing Association (NMMHA) has adopted similar arguments in opposing tenant-centered legislation. The Association has actively lobbied against reforms aimed at enhancing lease security, providing protections against retaliatory evictions, and expanding resident rights in cases of park sale or redevelopment.⁴ These efforts perpetuate a status quo in which residents have little recourse against sudden rent hikes, deteriorating infrastructure, or involuntary displacement. Both MHI and NMMHA represent the manufactured housing industry. We are their customers, yet they take a paternalistic position, assuming community landowners know what is best for community homeowners.
Further amplifying this resistance is the real estate lobby, which frequently aligns with manufactured housing interests to defeat legislation that protects tenants. Large real estate associations and affiliated political action committees (PACs) have invested heavily in lobbying to block rent control measures, community purchase rights, and enhanced landlord accountability provisions.⁵ These actors frame such legislation as market interference, despite clear evidence that deregulation contributes to housing insecurity and exploitation of vulnerable populations. Their influence—exerted through campaign contributions, regulatory appointments, and direct lobbying—has entrenched manufactured housing communities as investment assets rather than affordable, stable housing.
Together, these powerful interests—MHU, MHI, NMMHA, and the broader real estate lobby—have successfully delayed, diluted, or dismantled efforts to protect manufactured housing residents. The result is a systemic power imbalance in which residents, many of whom are seniors, low-income workers, or people with disabilities, are subject to increasingly precarious living conditions with few legal protections.
It is time to revisit and revitalize the model statute proposed in 2004, ensuring that policy is guided not by investor profit margins but by the fundamental principle that safe, stable housing is an essential human need. As such, it must be supported, protected, and prioritized.
Citations:
1. AARP Public Policy Institute & National Consumer Law Center. Manufactured Housing Community Tenants: Shifting the Balance of Power. 2004. https://www.nclc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/shifting-the-balance-of-power-manufactured-housing.pdf
2. Frank Rolfe, Mobile Home University. https://youtu.be/z8eE7_KPT4I?si=O7Stx_-oMRBp4BPU
3. Manufactured Housing Institute. “MHI Comments Opposing Rent Control Measures.” Public Policy Statements, 2020–2024. https://www.manufacturedhousing.org/advocacy/political-action-committee-pac/
4. New Mexico Manufactured Housing Association. Legislative Positions and Testimony, 2020–2023. Publicly accessible via NM legislative hearing records and NM Attorney General housing fairness reports.
5. National Low Income Housing Coalition. Out of Reach 2023: The High Cost of Housing. See also: Public campaign finance records and lobbying reports from the National Association of Realtors and affiliated PACs. https://nlihc.org/oor