Industry leaders appear to expect more demand for manufactured housing.  The optimism stems from the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. This bill, which has already been discussed on this site for another one of its programs (the Neighborhood Stabilization Program) includes a clause that increases the maximum loan amounts on FHA – insured loans.

The new law makes a difference on homes financed as personal property.  These are for the most part mobile homes that are placed in a land-lease park. That is a significant portion of the market — maybe as high as two-thirds of all sales in 2007.

The new limits for personal property homes will be $70,000.  FHA mortgages are popular in part because they are a product that can get people into homes with a low down payment.

I am not sure if mobile homes will really reach some kind of chic status within a new social order that values blue-collar.  Right now, things seem pretty fixated on local, sustainable, and organic.  That said, the logic is irrefutable that mobile homes are affordable.  Now that FHA-insured financing will be available for a greater share of the market for new homes, more shipments may very well follow.

The winds and fires in Southern California have burned hundreds of mobile homes.  One of the parks most affected is Oakridge Mobile Home Park, where many seniors live.  A recent estimate said that more than 500 homes have been impacted.

The story in today’s paper, concerning the plight of residents in the mobile home park, goes a long way to explain why mobile home parks remain popular.  They are very affordable and offer a tight knit community. It is an appealing mix, certainly one that contradicts the negative associations linked to some stereotypical versions of a “trailer park.”

Governor Schwarzenegger declared the area a public disaster.

The Fire is taking place in a part of Los Angeles known as Sylmar, and is called “the Tea Fire.”

One of the interesting questions for public policy occurs in response to disaster situations like this.  While all of the residents will qualify for help from FEMA, the State of California, and the Red Cross, will some be treated differently if their losses are sustained on “personal property?”

Today is the last day to submit a comment to HUD about the nature of manufactured homes that qualify for insurance under FHA Title I and Title II programs.

The proposed new rule would remove the requirement that homes in the program have a permanent foundation.  This by itself is a promising and significant development, as it would extend the insurance program to many more homes.  However, the new rule adds a stipulation that homes must still be taxed as real property.  This limits the scope of the insurance program.

A second aspect of the proposed new rule is also worth challenging.  It states that any home that has been moved from its initial setting is automatically excluded from the program.  At a time when many land-lease communities are closing, this is a rule that seems unfair.

An example of a model draft of a comment is available here, from CFED.  This is a group that has worked for many years to address issues surrounding manufactured housing.

Comments can be submitted online at regulations.gov.  It is important to put the Rule Change in the heading — RE: Doc. No. FR–5075–P–01.

Who should be the new leader of the Department of Housing and Urban Development?  Will it be someone chosen because of their close ties to housing?  Will it be a political friend of the new President?  Will it be a person with some wherewithall in the field of manufactured housing?

The last situation would be a real stroke of luck.  Housing and Urban Development is a department with strong ties to the political traditions of America’s largest cities.  That makes sense, of course.

Jesse Jackson, Jr. is one figure who might be tapped to lead HUD.  Then again, Jackson might decide that he would prefer to run for the vacant Senate seat in Illinois.

What if the person was someone apart from the urban tradition, but simultaenously drawn to looking at a broader perspective surrounding housing and housing finance?

One possibility in this vein would be a leader from the Manufactured Housing Institute.  Would Ken Cashlin or Joe Stegmayer be an appropriate choice? Or, it could be someone chosen on the friendly suggestion of MHI.  But, will MHI be in the room when the decision is made to pick the leadership that will govern its business for the next few years?

The MHI appears to have prepared for the new tone in politics.  In 2008, slightly more than half of their giving went to Democratic candidates, according to CampaignMoney.com.  That is a big difference from 2004, when only about 35 percent went to Dems.  The Dems that they supported were logical choices — leaders on finance (Brad Miller, Paul Kanjorski, Barney Frank), heads of important committees (John Dingell, David Price, Charles Rangel) or from rural states (Max Baucus).

Still, it does not seem likely that they will be there.  They didn’t give any money to Obama, or for that matter, to McCain.  Maybe they aren’t worried about chasing leadership posts.

Since last week, it has become clear that our country has taken a new turn politically.  The White House is Blue.  Most of the Republican Congressional seats in the Upper Midwest and Northeast are gone.  Some say that the Republicans have become a marginal party devoted just to increasingly out-of-step constituents in the Southern United States.

This means that trailer parks no longer have to go under the name of “workforce housing.”

Let me explain.  If the above reports are right, then George Lakoff and his theory of framing may lose its relevance.

Who is that?  Well, Dr. Lakoff is the UC-Berkeley professor, mostly known for his work on semiotics and linguistics, who found fame as a consultant to (more…)