Residents will suffer if caps are placed on rent for lots

Manufactured and modular housing offers a unique solution to the affordable housing crisis. Unfortunately, House Bill 1287 unfairly targets mobile home park owners and applies rent control to the land in mobile home parks in Colorado, putting this affordable housing option in jeopardy.

Some legislators believe rent control is the solution to affordable housing for Colorado’s most vulnerable residents: low- and moderate-income individuals. However, rent control is misleading, and only hurts the people it is supposed to help. While enacting a rental cap on the land under mobile homes or trailers initially seems successful because rates will stop rising in the controlled areas, eventually rent control restrictions will have created a housing game with clear winners and losers.

It is no coincidence that the bestknown rent-controlled cities, such as San Francisco, New York, and Seattle, have the worst affordable housing problems. A 2019 study at Stanford University confirmed that rent control in San Francisco resulted in a 15% decrease in rental housing supply.

Rent increases allow park owners to continue to operate their properties in a professional manner which allows them to continue to provide a variety of amenities and keep up with necessary repairs.

Like any other property owner, mobile home park owners bear the burden of inflation, increased taxation and labor costs. Without the ability to increase rent to respond to resident and property needs, operators will be forced to absorb these costs and impact their ability to own and run the parks effectively and successfully.

If park owners can no longer afford to operate, they may be forced to sell or close, putting this affordable housing option at risk.

Furthermore, the average mobile home rent increases are far below increases in other types of housing options. According to the Common Sense Institute, inflation rates have risen in the Denver metro area to 7.9%. But even amid inflation, mobile home rents remain affordable. According to a recent study from the Manufactured Housing Institute, mobile home park residents indicate that lease rates are competitive, and increases are at or lower than other housing alternatives and average rent payments are around $400 to $600 per month for the land the home sits on.

This legislation attempts to control rent for only one rental population: mobile homeowners who lease land in forprofit mobile home parks. It places no restrictions on rent increases for nonprofit entities or other for-profit entities like condo or apartment owners.

This bill is more focused on attacking the mobile home park owners by removing their rights and enforcing rent control than offering alternative funding sources and additional avenues for affordable housing.

This bill will do nothing to make homeownership more accessible and instead puts mobile home parks at risk, along with its residents. Why would the state want to restrict and penalize their largest provider of unsubsidized, affordable housing?

Like any other property owner, mobile home park owners bear the burden of inflation, increased taxation and labor costs.