Stay Informed!

By Lauren Williams on 02/10/2012 @ 12:17 PM

Tags: Federal Policy, Housing and Homeownership

Congressional hearings are typically information-gathering sessions where expert witnesses take the hot seat to provide oral testimony and respond to Congress members’ questions. On Wednesday, February 1, the House Financial Service Committee’s Subcommittee on Housing, Insurance and Community Opportunity held a hearing regarding the “Implementation of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000.” This time, they may have left with more questions than new information. Though this was only the third hearing I’ve attended on the Hill, it was easily the most interesting I’ve seen so far—it was well attended by both majority and minority representatives, the issues presented by the witnesses were controversial to say the least, and the representatives were moved to ask thoughtful, probing questions of the witnesses.

The Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 provided for a method of oversight for the HUD safety standard approval process that involves a Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee made up of industry, consumer, and general public interest representatives. It also established standards for adoption at the state level that govern manufactured home installation, installer licensing, and dispute resolution between industry, installers and consumers. Industry representatives voiced concerns that the Act has not been implemented as it was intended and that certain functions—primarily the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee—are not operating as they should.

The majority Representatives called the hearing to further investigate these issues, so the witnesses included mostly industry representatives providing testimony corroborating those concerns.

• Mr. John Bostick, Chair, Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform
• Mr. Edward Hussey, Immediate-Past Chair, Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform
• Mr. Dana Roberts, Past Chair, Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee
• Mr. Manuel Santana, Director of Engineering, Cavco Industries, Inc., on behalf of the Manufactured Housing Institute

The Acting Deputy Administrator for Manufactured Housing Programs at HUD, Henry Czauski, testified on behalf of the agency. Ishbel Dickens, Executive Director of the Manufactured Home Owners Association of America (MHOAA), was the only witness representing consumers of manufactured homes. CFED submitted a statement for the record that can be found here.

While industry representatives testified about their problems with the MHIA of 2000, with HUD, and with the Consensus Committee, Ishbel Dickens testified about both the value of the MHCC and other problems facing owners of manufactured homes. She reminded the representatives of the importance of the MHCC and its function as the only public arena in which owners of manufactured homes can exercise their voices to ensure the integrity of their homes’ construction as it is codified by HUD regulations. She reminded the representatives of the perils that owners of manufactured homes in communities often face—insecure land tenure, unfair and unscrupulous landlords, economic eviction, and more. She reminded them that although manufactured homes often start out as an affordable homeownership option for millions of Americans, archaic industry systems governing sale, financing, and placement of manufactured homes can quickly turn homebuyers into “prisoners in their own homes.”

The representatives had even more questions about details regarding the MHIA of 2000’s implementation, how other existing entities like the MHCC operate and how the Act really affects innovation in the manufactured housing industry. More importantly, however, the representatives—both on the minority and majority sides—wanted to know what could be done about the unique set of problems faced by owners of manufactured homes. They want to know how these homes are financed and how a secondary market can be created to facilitate a safer financing market for manufactured homes. They had so many questions, in fact, that they suggested holding another hearing in the future to keep the conversation going.

Given the wealth of questions raised by the testimonies given at this hearing, one of the representatives mentioned that there may be sufficient need for an additional hearing to gather even more information. We would encourage future sessions to focus even more attention on topics like the health of the manufactured home lending industry and how it can be improved to better serve both homeowners and lenders.

Comments

Leave a Comment

Email*

First Name*

Last Name

Title

Comment*

Formatting Help

You Type	You See
*italics*	italics
**bold**	bold
[ask google](http://google.com)	ask google
+ item 1 + item 2 + item 3	item 1 item 2 item 3
> a really cool quote from a nice person	a really cool quote from a nice person

Comment

* Required information

Preview