Other State Solutions

Many states have meaningful laws to protect residents in manufactured home communities (MHCs). Legal protections and oversight are essential to protect this vital source of affordable housing and the investments and well-being of resident homeowners.

In 2004, the AARP Public Policy Institute and the National Consumer Law Center 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, presents and explains this model legislation. Notably, the concerns and remedies outlined more than two decades ago remain strikingly relevant today. This underscores how effectively these issues have been suppressed or ignored—largely due to sustained industry opposition.

Opportunity to Purchase

So far, 21 U.S. states have some form of Opportunity to Purchase (OTP) or Right of First Refusal (ROFR) laws that give resident homeowners within a manufactured home community (MHC) an opportunity to purchase their community land. These laws vary widely in strength and scope, but all aim to allow residents, nonprofits, or public entities to acquire community land and secure it for the benefit of the community. OTP shifts the focus from vehicles for extracting revenue to a focus on affordable community living.

Opportunity to Purchase bills were introduced in New Mexico and rejected by its lawmakers in 2010, 2023, and 2025.

Anti-Rent Gouging Laws

Increasingly, states are enacting rent stabilization laws that cap rent increases or require justification for them. These laws protect renters and land tenants from sudden, unaffordable hikes in housing costs. They promote housing stability, prevent displacement, and preserve community integrity.

Anti-rent-gouging laws are essential for land lease communities, where residents own their homes but rent the land beneath them. Even though they are homeowners and bear all maintenance costs, they remain vulnerable because there are often no limits on the frequency or amount of land rent increases. Manufactured homes are difficult—or even impossible—to relocate. Older manufactured homes are at risk of structural damage during relocation, and many lenders and insurers refuse to cover homes after they have been moved. Moving a manufactured home can cost $5,000 to $20,000.

Because relocation is not feasible, residents are often trapped by rising rents. Without legal protections, landlords can exploit this vulnerability, raising rents until residents are forced out. Some landlords then seize the abandoned homes and resell or re-rent them—a practice promoted in real estate circles like Mobile Home University.

Some examples of how other states prevent rent gouging:

• Rhode Island allows for binding arbitration if a majority of residents believe a rent increase is excessive.
• In Florida, rent increases must be reasonable and justifiable, not arbitrary. In cases of disputes over rent increases, homeowners can initiate mediation with the landowner.
• California uses a system of Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSOs), local ordinances that regulate the amount landowners can increase space rent in land-lease communities. New Jersey and other states also leave rent stabilization up to municipalities.
• In Vermont, rent increases can be challenged by leaseholders if the increase exceeds a certain percentage, known as the “mediation threshold.” This threshold is based on the Housing Component of the U.S. Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus one percent and can change annually.
• In Arizona, if a mobile home park landlord increases rent by more than 10% plus the current Consumer Price Index in 12 months, tenants may be eligible for relocation fund assistance. The Arizona Department of Housing administers this assistance.
• Oregon law generally limits rent increases to 7% plus inflation, or 10%, whichever is less. For communities with more than 30 spaces, a bill passed in April 2025 further restricts increases to 6% annually.
• Washington State recently implemented statewide rent caps to protect these residents. In manufactured home communities, lot rent increases are now limited to 5% annually. Other residential rentals are capped at 7% plus inflation or 10%, whichever is lower.

Rent stabilization was introduced in New Mexico and rejected by its lawmakers in 2023 and 2025.

Minimum Term Lease

The AARP/NCLC model statute provides for a two-year lease, renewable indefinitely, in which the level or manner of future rent increases is disclosed in the lease. “This information provides consumers with the ability to negotiate before moving in and eliminates any surprise increases afterward.”

Here’s the model state statute created by AARP and the National Consumer Law Center.

All rental agreements shall be for a term of two years unless a longer period is mutually agreed upon by the resident and manufactured housing community operator.

In Massachusetts, the landowner must offer new tenants a five-year lease. Tenants can choose a different lease term if they prefer. However, for leases of five years or less, the landowner must specifically require that the lessee will not discontinue or change the use of the manufactured housing community during the term of the lease.

The New Mexico Mobile Home Park Act requires a written lease with no term requirement. Some landowners do not provide written leases. Most are month-to-month.

Closure and Conversion Protections

A decision by the landowner to close the community and force residents to vacate can be devastating for individuals, families, municipalities, and the state. At its extreme, because of the prevalence of low and fixed-income residents, community closures increase homelessness. At the very least, the residents suffer significant financial, personal, and emotional hardships. Several states have strong notice and mitigation requirements. Some counties and cities have ordinances requiring MHC landowners to seek approval from the Planning Director before closures.

• Advanced notice. If a landowner decides to change the use of the manufactured home community land, adequate advanced notice is the first consideration.
• In Massachusetts, each resident is entitled to at least two years’ written notice before the discontinuance or change of use will occur.
• Colorado, Oregon, and other states require at least 12 months’ notice.
• Relocation Payment. If a resident or family is required to relocate their home (or abandon it if it cannot be relocated), they should be entitled to a relocation payment from the landowner and/or a state relocation fund.
• Arizona offers funds for relocation or, if a homeowner is forced to abandon their home, with maximums of $12,500 for single-section homes and $20,000 for multi-section homes.
• In Colorado, if a community closes due to the landowner’s decision to change the land use, the landlord is required to provide relocation assistance to homeowners. This can include paying for the actual costs of moving the home and belongings within a 100-mile radius. Homeowners can also demand that the landlord purchase their mobile home if they don’t want to relocate.
• If relocation is not possible, some states provide compensation for abandonment, typically around 40% of the maximum relocation amount.

In New Mexico, 6-month notice is required with NO provisions to mitigate damages.

Enforcement/Consumer Protection Agencies

New Mexico’s Mobile Home Park Act, enacted in 1983, is essentially useless without a robust enforcement mechanism that exists in other states. While the law itself is intended to protect residents, its effectiveness diminishes significantly if there’s no means to ensure compliance. See “Channel 4 Investigates: The Mobile Home Park Act“.

Many states offer vigorous protections for residents of manufactured home communities. Here are a few examples:

• The Massachusetts Attorney General offers regulations and extensive information, guidance, and oversight as part of their effort to protect this important form of affordable housing. Download
• Washington State Attorney General’s office provides information and guidance under their “Serve the People” and “Safeguarding Consumers” sections. They also have a Manufactured Housing Dispute Resolution Program (MHDRP).
• Oregon has a Manufactured Home Communities Resource Center, which is an informational and training center for tenants and landlords living in manufactured home parks.
• In Arizona, the Arizona Department of Housing is the primary enforcement agency for manufactured home communities.
• In Colorado, the Division of Housing’s Mobile Home Oversight Program conducts outreach and education on mobile home park laws and provides an annual park registration system. The program also receives and investigates complaints, facilitates dispute resolution, and takes enforcement actions.
• In Florida, enforcement of regulations related to mobile home parks is primarily handled by the Florida Department of Health and, in some cases, by local county health departments. The Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) also plays a role in regulating the industry.