Sorry, Don’t Buy Senate Brief: “the Facts: The 21st Century Road To Housing Act” Won’t Work Unless Amended 

HUD’s own research shows that, for more than 50 years, lawmakers and public officials have repeatedly promised fixes that never materialized.

The Senate ironically proves their bill won’t work in their own U.S. Senate brief. “Myth 5: The ROAD to Housing Act preempts local zoning decisions. Fact: By design, the 21^st Century ROAD to Housing Act does not preempt local or state zoning. This is one reason why the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National League of Cities support the bill. Chairman Scott believes zoning decisions are best made locally, not in Washington.” To see why that’s the wrong approach, look no further than California Governor Gavin Newsome (D) who told Bill Maher (bold added) the following. “I couldn’t agree more with Ezra [Klein, author of Abundance], it’s an indictment of liberal governance and leadership, and he attacks California, rightfully, in many categories and respects, the high-speed rail, as it relates to housing production, and we own that. But we also own the response. 42…reform bills I’ve passed, there [are] 20 bills we’re working on right now. We’re trying to address the issue that is the issue that dominates, and that’s localism.”

Pew Research via “States Take Crucial Steps to Expand Supply of Lower-Cost Single-Family Homes.” said in that report, “The urgency to build more homes grows as the nation confronts a widespread housing shortage, estimated at 4 million to 7 million homes.” “During the past five years, nine states have enacted zoning reforms to facilitate use of manufactured homes, which typically cost 45% less per square foot than traditional, site-built homes, as a housing option in more neighborhoods.”

Congress can’t ignore the reality of NIMBYism or “localism” and still pretend that they are solving anything. 

States are increasingly invoking statewide preemption, precisely because “localism,” or “NIMBYism” towards the most affordable form of unsubsidized permanent housing in the U.S. is a critical barrier.

Keep in mind that the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) repeatedly admitted that some 75 percent of the public can’t afford a new ‘site built’ conventional house. They can’t build a home almost anywhere in the U.S. that most first-time buyers can afford without more subsidies.

If Senators Tim Scott (SC-R) and Elizabeth Warren (MA-D) and others in both chambers and in both major parties fail to address localism through mandates instead of incentives or more research, their bill will only result in failure to deliver on its many promises. 

The status quo may make special interests happy (see below). But tens of millions who need more affordable homes may rightly feel blindsided and betrayed by politicians who said one thing via pending bills and then deliver yet another bill that missed the mark.

The Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) repeatedly pointed out that under current federal law, the tools already exist to overcome both affordable financing hurdles and the problem of NIMBYism or ‘localisms’ zoning barriers to more manufactured homes. 

MHARR has proposed two simple amendments that would fix either of the bills or some variation of them.

Quoting Pew: “Local zoning barriers often rule out manufactured housing as a viable option for prospective homeowners, despite its affordability and its quality, which is now on par with site-built housing. Zoning laws and other factors—such as limited access to affordable loans with interest rates and consumer protections similar to those of mortgages—have contributed to persistently low manufactured home shipments in the past two decades. Currently, builders deliver about 100,000 manufactured homes per year, approximately a quarter of the industry’s 1998 production level.” 

Only mandates will fix what Pew, Newsom, MHARR or others are talking about. 

As the population and demand for affordable housing have grown, the production of HUD Code manufactured housing has slumped dramatically. RVs are routinely deemed a luxury item, while manufactured homes are an affordable housing necessity for most Americans. Yet in a recent year, RVs hit as high as 600,000 shipments while manufactured housing hovered around 100,000, a far cry from the 373,143 homes produced in 1998.

Curiously, the Manufactured Housing Institute, and their prominent members Clayton Homes (BRK), Champion Homes (SKY), and Cavco Industries (CVCO) are all on record supporting the Housing for the 21st Century Act without the MHARR amendments. Given that former MHI vice-chair and chairman Bill Boor, CEO of Cavco on behalf of MHI told Congress they want to see HUD enforce federal enhanced preemption, why are they failing to press for that now?

The sobering answer appears to be, per Google’s AI powered Gemini, that the current barriers act as a “moat” that benefits their consolidation focused dominating members. 

“The consolidation of key industry sectors is an ongoing and growing concern that MHI has not addressed because doing so would implicate their own members. Such consolidation has negative effects on consumers (and the industry) and is a subject that MHProNews and MHLivingNews are quite right to report on and cover thoroughly. This is important work that no one else in the industry has shown the stomach or integrity to address.”

– Mark Weiss, J.D., President and CEO MHARR.

Controversial MHI member Frank Rolfe bluntly asserted the following.

“If you want to solve U.S. affordable housing you would have to eliminate all the barriers…zoning restrictions, and let the free market take over. Next thing you’d know, smart entrepreneurs would build 3-D printed home subdivisions and other novel, new ideas and the price of homes would plummet…based on the power of capitalism and competition. But, of course, that’s not going to happen, and we all know it. So don’t tell me “we can’t solve affordable housing” because the correct statement is “we don’t want to solve affordable housing”. There are too many special interests – both inside and outside the government – to ever let that happen.”

Pew. Rolfe. Newsom. Weiss. The Senate’s own two-page “one pager” all demonstrate why the Senate or House bills, unless the MHARR amendments are added, won’t solve the housing crisis because it fails to preempt the local zoning barriers that are at the heart of the crisis.

Perhaps as or more vexing? 

HUD and the FHFA know these things, because at least on paper, MHI and MHARR have said similarly for years. But when the rubber meets the proverbial ROAD bill, MHI is proving that consolidation of the industry is something they want. 

Meanwhile, the only logical and proven path to deliver what President Trump said he wants – to keep existing prices on housing high to protect the wealth of current homeowners can be met by the only proven at scale tool to build enough new housing at affordable prices. Namely, HUD Code manufactured homes.

Polk County Commissioner Bill Braswell aptly said.

Americans have demanded a solution to the affordable housing crisis. That discussion almost always begins with the question: What is government going to do about it? My view is simple. Government is not capable of solving this problem and history proves it. 

We have all seen government housing projects. Many from the past became centers of crime and blight.

…Unfortunately, manufactured housing, commonly referred to as mobile homes, has been stigmatized for decades. Local governments across the country have often regulated them out of existence, based on outdated perceptions that no longer reflect reality.

Today’s manufactured homes are built to dramatically higher standards than in the past. They are safer, more energy-efficient, more storm-resistant, and far more attractive than older models. They can be installed quickly, and most importantly, they remain one of the only truly affordable paths to homeownership.

Braswell said he’s taken the NIMBYism on the chin, but knows it is the only proven solution for the housing crisis. 

Congress already passed in a widely bipartisan fashion the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 the provision to overcome local zoning barriers commonly known as “enhanced preemption.” 

Congress already passed the Duty to Serve (DTS) manufactured housing as part of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA). 

Since those bills are inconsistently and improperly enforced, per MHARR and MHI, why should we be surprised if this emerging legislation will also fail as HUD researchers admit that over 50 years of history proves?

Congress, please fix the bill. Stop promising and start delivering.

Tony Kovach is a managing member of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.