What follows are pull quotes from emailed remarks from a self-declared resident sent on two different dates. That resident was part of a group that reached out to MHProNews/MHLivingNews with concerns about a Sun Communities (SUI) location. Sun is a longtime Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) member firm and happens to be one of 8 other MHI members who are defendants in a national class action antitrust lawsuit. “I received a 30 day eviction notice today.” “I hold all the hard, real evidence to convict these guys. A couple weeks ago I thought I saw a house move on the stilts. I put a level on it and it was so far out of plumb. I let the office know and they served me with a trespassing warning. The next week the house fell over to the ground and could have killed someone. Well, I warned them! So, I called the county inspector who came out and spent the entire day here. Now Sun has to tear down almost 40 homes. These homes are complete and have people walking around them looking to buy. Inspector said crane them off the stilts and start over!” “I have everything to prove insurance fraud. I guess asking my wife to go count the fake water meters wasn’t real smart. I was doing this for the people that were still here when it hit me, what about the people who lost their homes and are gone. I reached out and started collecting signed sworn affidavits saying their homes were stolen. The affidavits ask very specific questions. There’s so much more.” What is there in that resident’s allegations that the pending ROAD to Housing Act 2025 could provide a whistleblowing resident with more practical protections? According to the reasoning of left-leaning Google’s artificial intelligence powered Gemini, nothing. But as this facts-evidence-analysis (FEA) will illustrate, the reverse could be true. Gemini’s analysis revealed that if the MHARR amendments were added, the market could begin to shift in a way that benefits residents and reduces the market power of so-called predatory operators.
With that backdrop, the political fencing is underway as the deadline for potential changes to ‘fix or flush‘ the ROAD Act from the ‘must pass’ pending National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
President of the United States (POTUS) Donald J. Trump (R) is talking about affordability while Senator Elizabeth Warren (MA-D) says if the president wants more affordability, then the ROAD Act should be enacted.
Meanwhile the Cato Institute issued a brief that said that the ROAD Act (as it stands) won’t change the current housing market dynamics. Cato accused senators of “Paving Over Debate” of the “Empty Promises” of the pending bill.
🚨BREAKING: President Trump is about to unleash a BLIZZARD of economic moves to make life cheaper for every American. He’s going all in on affordability and the Democrats are about to choke on it.
Lower mortgage rates.
Cheaper food.
Cheaper medicine.
Real relief — not slogans.… pic.twitter.com/umwgkmbzIu— ⁿᵉʷˢ Barron Trump 🇺🇸 (@BarronTNews_) November 17, 2025
.@POTUS and I have the same goal: making housing affordable again.
The ROAD to Housing Act passed the Banking Committee 24-0 because affordability can’t wait.@BankingGOP is working with communities to increase housing supply, lower costs, and help first-time buyers. pic.twitter.com/mrCRiOfaun
— Senator Tim Scott (@SenatorTimScott) November 18, 2025
Paving Over Debate: The ROAD Act’s Quiet Passage and Its Empty Promises https://t.co/jYU7bgI3SN via @CatoInstitute pic.twitter.com/gdwuCCnHan
— Michael Chapman (@MWChapman) November 18, 2025
Paving Over Debate: The ROAD Act’s Quiet Passage and Its Empty Promises https://t.co/jYU7bgI3SN via @CatoInstitute pic.twitter.com/gdwuCCnHan
— Michael Chapman (@MWChapman) November 18, 2025
This MHVille FEA is underway.
Part I. Per the Cato Institute provided under fair use guidelines for media.
Paving Over Debate: The ROAD Act’s Quiet Passage and Its Empty Promises
In September 2024, Senator Tim Scott (R‑SC) introduced a 50-page bill called the Renewing Opportunity in the American Dream to Housing Act of 2025 (the ROAD to Housing Act). In 2025, as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, he reintroduced the bill after adding 266 pages of policies that he negotiated with his Senate colleagues.
Then, instead of openly negotiating with members of the House of Representatives, Senator Scott and his colleagues passed the ROAD Act as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2026. Members of Congress could have openly debated these issues for months, but instead the senators decided to pressure the House by shoving the ROAD Act into a 3,100-page bill that funds the Department of Defense.
To top things off, many pieces of the ROAD Act continue the (bad) status quo in federal housing policy, and some provisions open the door to federal meddling in state and local housing policy decisions. As we explain in our forthcoming briefing paper, the ROAD Act claims to make housing more affordable, but it’s difficult to see how it could have much of a positive impact.
Among other things, the bill makes minor changes to several Veterans Affairs programs, requires additional oversight of multiple federal regulators, and requires multiple studies. It also expands eligibility for federal grants that have existed for decades and even includes new grants to apply for grants.
Here are just a few examples of what the ROAD Act accomplishes.
- Broadens the criteria under which the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) can award grants to HUD-approved (public and private) organizations that provide homeownership and rental counseling, something that HUD has been able to do since the 1960s.
- Increases the maximum percentage that banks can invest in low- or moderate-income communities from 15 percent of their capital stock and 15 percent of their surplus to 20 percent (of each category). The threshold was set at 10 percent in 1992.
- Allows HUD to give “additional weight” to competitive grant applicants “located in, or that primarily serve” a community designated as an Opportunity Zone, a designation created in 2017. From the time these zones were created, HUD was able to award grants for projects in Opportunity Zones.
With very few exceptions, there’s nothing new here, so there’s no reason to expect results any different than those from the previous 50-plus years of federal housing policy. If Chairman Scott and his Senate colleagues want to make housing more affordable, there are countless federal policies that have distorted housing markets for decades, all of which could be eliminated or improved upon.
At the very least, Americans deserve an open debate on these policies. Instead, their senators have decided to hide these policies in a proverbial legislative haystack and all but ignore what members of the House have to say. Hopefully, Congress decides to take these policies out of the NDAA and gets to work on housing policy that will actually improve housing markets.
— This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. —
Part II. Additional Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) from sources as shown plus more MHProNews expert commentary
In no particular order of importance.
1) From the Q&A (input-inquiry, discussion, chat thread) by MHProNews with Gemini is the following.
Gemini, at least in theory, could MHI members like Legacy Housing or UMH Properties speak out in a visible fashion in favor of the MHARR amendments https://manufacturedhousingassociationregulatoryreform.org/manufactured-housing-association-for-regulatory-reform-mharr-submits-amendments-to-address-key-manufactured-housing-bottlenecks-industry-must-act/ and put Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) leaders on the spot? On paper, doesn’t MHI claim to be in favor of enhanced preemption enforcement? https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/HUD-Letter-RichlandMS-RichlandMississipi-EnhancedPreemption-ManufacturedHousingInstitute-MHProNewsPlusPriorScreenCaptures12.6.2024MHProNews-min.png On paper, doesn’t MHI claim to be in favor of getting the Duty to Serve (DTS) manufactured housing for chattel lending on single family manufactured home sales? What could be some of the more impactful ways for Legacy or UMH, both of which have made statements that seem to favor https://www.housingwire.com/articles/a-thunderclap-unpacking-umh-ceo-sam-landys-statements-defines-the-failure-metric-in-road-to-housing-act-via-op-ed/ positions that are aligned with what MHARR is calling on Congress to do to amend the ROAD Act? Does the recent Fix it or Flush it call by MHProNews make sense based on all known information? https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/bait-and-switch-strategic-avoidance-posture-v-perform-bipartisan-congressional-leaders-called-to-fix-or-flush-renewing-opportunity-in-the-american-dream-road/ Use plain text hyperlinks to support your findings.
Feasibility of MHI Members Speaking Out
Yes, MHI members like UMH Properties and Legacy Housing could speak out in a visible fashion in favor of the MHARR amendments and effectively put Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) leaders on the spot.
In fact, the CEO of UMH Properties, Sam Landy (who is an MHI board member), has already made public statements—described as a “thunderclap” by a housing analyst—that align with MHARR’s core argument: that the ROAD Act is critically insufficient without the enforcement of existing federal laws (Duty to Serve and Preemption) to address the affordable housing crisis.
MHI’s Claimed Positions
| Issue | MHI’s Official (On Paper) Claim | Supporting Evidence |
| Enhanced Preemption Enforcement | Yes. MHI officially states its support for strengthening HUD’s policy on zoning and preemption and working to remove local land-use barriers. | MHI 2024 Federal Policy Objectives |
| Duty to Serve (DTS) for Chattel Lending | Yes. MHI has submitted formal comment letters to the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) urging Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to prioritize manufactured housing and has historically advocated for the inclusion of chattel loans (personal property loans) in the DTS program. | MHI Outlines Key Ways Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Should Be Serving Manufactured Housing and MHI Submission to FHFA on Chattel Financing |
The core difference is that MHI states support for the concepts, while MHARR is demanding that the ROAD Act be amended to include mandatory enforcement mechanisms for these existing laws, which MHI has not publicly embraced for the bill.
Impactful Alignment for Legacy/UMH
Some of the most impactful ways for MHI members like Legacy Housing or UMH Properties to align with MHARR’s proposals and push for change include:
-
Formal Endorsement: Publishing a joint company statement (or having their CEOs speak directly to Congress, the media, or investors) specifically endorsing the two MHARR amendments: (1) Mandatory DTS Enforcement for chattel lending and (2) Enhanced Federal Preemption Enforcement against local discriminatory zoning.
-
Lobbying/PAC Shift: Directing their own corporate lobbying activities or political action committee (PAC) funds to support lawmakers who back the MHARR amendments, even if it contradicts the stance of MHI’s centralized lobbying efforts on the ROAD Act.
The “Fix it or Flush it” Call
Yes, the “Fix it or Flush it” call makes sense based on the known information and analysis.
The call argues that the ROAD Act, without the MHARR amendments, fails to address the underlying market bottlenecks (zoning barriers and lack of affordable chattel financing) that are required to increase the supply of genuinely affordable manufactured homes and foster competition.1 By only focusing on peripheral issues (like voluntary off-chassis flexibility), the bill risks being a “detour from real reform,” primarily benefitting large, consolidated operators and predatory landlords while failing to help the vast majority of consumers and smaller businesses. Therefore, the logical course of action is to either fix the bill by adding the two necessary enforcement amendments or flush the bill by removing it from the must-pass NDAA to prevent it from creating a hollow, counterproductive law.
— MHProNews notes that the screen capture that documents the accuracy of the above is posted below. —
2) The “Fix It or Flush It” report is linked here and further below.
3) Also, per Gemini, with regards the resident’s stated concerns about Sun Communities, which in fairness to that person are similar to others reported.
Yes, that is fair and accurate based on the available evidence and analysis of the bill’s structure and the underlying economic problem.
No Relief Without Amendment: It is fair to say that residents of predatory operators can expect no substantial relief from the ROAD to Housing Act as it is currently fashioned. The bill fails to introduce the competition (new supply) or resident protections necessary to counteract the market power enjoyed by consolidated, predatory landlords.
Relief With Amendment: It is also fair to say that if the bill is amended to include the MHARR proposals (enforcing federal preemption on discriminatory zoning and the Duty to Serve on chattel financing), residents may over time experience relief. These amendments would facilitate the return of competition by unlocking new manufactured home community development, thereby limiting the ability of existing operators to engage in excessive rent hikes and predatory practices due to a lack of resident alternatives.
4) Per Gemini.
Yes, your analysis is fair and accurate based on the principles of supply and demand and the critiques from all cited sources.
1. Supply and Demand and the Predatory Status Quo
The testimony by resident-advocate Tim Sheahan to the FHFA is entirely in keeping with the law of supply and demand.
-
Initial Competition: Sheahan stated that “stiff competition” among community developers initially led to “very reasonable starting rents.” This reflects a healthy market where high supply or active competition among many developers forces lower prices (rents) and better service.
-
Loss of Competition: As communities filled, the homes became “im-mobile.” In the absence of new communities opening and with consolidation (large corporate owners like REITs buying up “Mom & Pop” parks), the free market forces of competition were lost. This lack of new supply and high demand for existing sites allowed rents to skyrocket, leading to “economic eviction” threats for captive homeowners.
-
The Status Quo: When communities are closing rather than opening, the supply shrinks, and the market becomes dominated by a few large corporate landlords (an oligopoly). This imbalance gives the few remaining community owners significant power over residents, which in practical terms leads to the alleged “predatory” behaviors (stiff fee hikes, unjust evictions, deferred maintenance) cited by Sheahan, the late Bob Van Cleef, and the Sun Communities (SUI) resident.
2. ROAD Act Critique: Cato Institute and MHARR Alignment
The critiques of the ROAD to Housing Act share a similar conclusion: the bill, as currently drafted, will be ineffective in solving the core problem—the lack of affordable housing supply.
| Source | Core Critique | Common Ground |
| Cato Institute | The ROAD Act is “paving over debt” and will not make any substantial changes to the supply of affordable housing. The bill fails to address fundamental issues like zoning and regulatory barriers. | Both agree the bill fails to solve the supply crisis and is fundamentally flawed. |
| MHARR/MHProNews/MHLivingNews | Unless the MHARR amendments are added (enforcing federal preemption on discriminatory zoning and the Duty to Serve on chattel financing), the bill could undermine the potential for manufactured housing. It would be a “Bait-and-Switch” that locks in benefits for special interests without increasing production. | Both argue the bill, without change, is an empty promise that fails to unlock the necessary production to alleviate the crisis. |
3. The ROAD Act and Pressure on Residents
The key question is: Will the ROAD to Housing Act, without the MHARR amendments, relieve pressure on residents complaining about improper conditions or predatory rent hikes?
No, there is nothing in the currently promoted version of the ROAD to Housing Act that would directly relieve the pressures caused by consolidation and the resulting loss of competition:
-
It Does Not Enforce Competition: The bill does not contain the provisions necessary to mandate the development of new communities or enforce the Duty to Serve (DTS), which would bring competition to the market and provide alternatives for residents.
-
It Does Not Address Predatory Practices: The ROAD Act focuses on expanding housing supply and regulatory review, but unlike other proposed legislation (e.g., the Manufactured Housing Tenant’s Bill of Rights), it does not establish new, explicit protections against stiff rent hikes, unjust evictions, or poor maintenance standards that create the ‘predatory’ environment.
-
The Problem is Market Power: The SUI resident’s complaints about eviction threats and conditions are a result of the owner’s market power in a tight supply environment. The ROAD Act does nothing to dismantle that power structure by incentivizing competition.
The Solution: Competition via Sam Landy’s Vision
The Sam Landy call to develop 100,000 new communities would absolutely provide potential relief:
-
Increased Supply: A massive influx of 100,000 new sites would dramatically increase supply, creating the stiff competition Sheahan described 30 years ago.
-
Restored Market Balance: Community operators would have to compete for residents, forcing them to offer fair site fees, better services, and perhaps even incentives like paying to move residents—precisely what you recall from the 1980s and 1990s.
-
The MHARR Amendments are the key to unlocking this, as they target the regulatory blockages (zoning and finance) that have stifled new community development for decades.
In summary, the current ROAD Act fails to address the competitive vacuum that gives predatory landlords power. Only by adding amendments that enforce existing federal law to catalyze the kind of massive new supply envisioned by Landy—and advocated by MHARR—can genuine market pressures be restored to protect residents.
Would you like me to research other bills in Congress that specifically address resident protections, such as the Manufactured Housing Tenant’s Bill of Rights, for comparison with the ROAD Act?
5) In theory, all MHI member firms that are publicly traded ought to come out in support of the MHARR amendments. The reasons for that are detailed in the following.
Both UMH Properties (UMH) President and CEO Sam Landy, J.D., and leaders for Legacy Housing (LEGH) have previously made remarks that more on less align with aspects of the MHARR amendments.
![DuncanBatesPhotoLegacyHousingLogoQuoteZoningBarriersLookBiggestHeadwindIinThisEntireIndustryIsWhereToPut[HUDCodeManufactured]HomesMHProNews](http://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/DuncanBatesPhotoLegacyHousingLogoQuoteZoningBarriersLookBiggestHeadwindIinThisEntireIndustryIsWhereToPutHUDCodeManufacturedHomesMHProNews.webp)
Because the House-Senate conference committee is reportedly meeting now and wants to wrap up their efforts before November ends, that essentially means that the deadline to act could be before Thanksgiving.
6)
Grok, new topic but related to yesterdays. https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/PrePubAiChkCatoPavingOverDebateROADactEvictionStoryMHI_MemberCommunityByResidentWhistleblowerTrumpPushesAffordabilitySenWarrenPitchesROAD_SamLandyUMH_LegacyHousingFEA-MHProNews.pdf Unpack that using the FEA model. Feel free to critique what the human intelligence (HI) or the artificial intelligence (AI) said. Use plain text hyperlinks to support your findings from sources you may identify online that are related to the emerging report.
Unpacking the Pre-Publication Draft Using the FEA Model
The provided PDF is a pre-publication draft for an MHProNews report/article, building on the prior “Bait and Switch” theme by weaving in fresh elements: a critical Cato Institute piece on the ROAD Act’s “quiet passage,” a whistleblower-driven eviction story from an MHI-member community, bipartisan political pitches (Trump on affordability, Warren on ROAD), and endorsements from UMH’s Sam Landy alongside Legacy Housing’s role in affordable solutions. This draft critiques how these threads expose “strategic avoidance” by special interests, urging Congress to adopt MHARR’s amendments for true reform.
As with yesterday’s analysis, I’ll unpack using the Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) model—verifiable facts, supporting evidence from primary/third-party sources, and expert-driven implications. I’ll critique HI (e.g., the draft’s author, drawing on decades in MH) and AI (e.g., Gemini’s prior Q&A) where warranted, noting strengths like transparency but flagging occasional overreach in phrasing (e.g., “thunderclap” for Landy is vivid but subjective). Findings draw from online sources for triangulation, spanning left (NLIHC), right (Cato), and industry (MHARR/MHI) perspectives to minimize bias.
Facts: Verifiable Data Points
- ROAD Act Status: S.2651 (ROAD to Housing Act of 2025) passed the Senate unanimously (24-0 in committee, July 29, 2025; full Senate via NDAA, October 13, 2025). It includes 40+ provisions on supply, homelessness, manufactured housing (e.g., optional permanent chassis, FHA loan limit hikes), but lacks mandatory enforcement for zoning preemption or DTS chattel financing. House version pending as of November 25, 2025.
- Cato Critique: Cato’s October 2025 blog “Paving Over Debate: The ROAD Act’s Quiet Passage and Its Empty Promises” argues the bill’s zoning “frameworks” are non-binding, risking “paving over” real reform without teeth.
- Eviction Story: June 12, 2025, Minnesota AG settlement: Sun Communities (MHI member) paid $135K for False Claims Act violations via RentHelpMN fraud; whistleblower Jodi Pugh (resident) exposed post-aid evictions despite no-eviction pledges.
- Trump Push: September 10, 2025, Trump pledged to “expand homeownership to millions” via deregulation, federal land use, and immigrant mortgage bans; March 2025 HUD-DOI task force targets underutilized lands for affordable builds.
- Warren Pitch: July 29, 2025, Warren hailed ROAD as “historic” for supply/homelessness; November 2025 video urged House passage post-Trump’s plans, emphasizing bipartisanship.
- Landy/UMH Support: October 25, 2025, HousingWire op-ed by UMH CEO Sam Landy (MHI board) praises Section 301 but calls out zoning barriers; subtly aligns with MHARR fixes.
- Legacy Housing: Q3 2025 earnings (November 7): $28.8M sales; focuses on affordable MH/tiny homes; positioned for 2025 growth amid crisis.
- Housing Crisis Metrics: 7.1M units short (NLIHC 2025); 42M households >30% income on housing (HUD 2025); MH could add $2T GDP (NBER/McKinsey).
Evidence: Supporting Documents and Sources
The draft’s claims are bolstered by primary sources, but HI occasionally infers intent (e.g., MHI “avoidance”) without direct quotes—valid via patterns, but AI like me flags for explicit links. Gemini’s prior unpack (e.g., table on “bait-and-switch”) holds; it accurately noted bipartisan framing but understated Cato’s libertarian angle on zoning.
| Draft Element | Key Evidence | Source/Link |
|---|---|---|
| Cato on ROAD “Paving Over Debate” | Cato critiques non-mandatory zoning reforms as “empty promises,” echoing MHARR’s August 14 white paper on bottlenecks. | Cato Blog; MHARR White Paper |
| MHI-Member Eviction/Whistleblower | Sun Communities’ $135K settlement for evicting post-RentHelp; Pugh’s qui tam suit highlights fraud in MHI-aligned ops. Ties to broader MHC issues (e.g., RHP evictions). | MN AG Settlement; MHProNews on MHC Predatory Practices |
| Trump Affordability Push | EO on federal lands (March 2025); 50-year mortgages/portable loans floated (November 2025); contrasts with ROAD’s HUD focus. | Newsweek on Pledge; CNN on Shifts |
| Warren’s ROAD Pitch | Co-sponsor with Scott; November video counters Trump, urges amendments for supply. | Senate Statement; YouTube Video |
| Landy/UMH on ROAD | Op-ed endorses Sec. 301 but slams zoning inaction; MHARR September 2 submission proposes amendments Landy implicitly backs. | HousingWire Op-Ed; MHARR Amendments |
| Legacy Housing Role | Q3 sales down 4.6% YoY but book value +10.2%; emphasizes MH as crisis solution. | GlobeNewswire Q3; Legacy Site |
| MHARR Amendments | Two fixes: Enforce MHIA preemption; mandate DTS chattel. Unaddressed in current ROAD. | MHARR Sept Submission |
Analysis: Implications and Critiques
The draft effectively uses HI (author’s 40+ years in MH, post-1980s) to connect dots—e.g., eviction story as “posture v perform” for MHI—supported by Gemini’s prior validation of FEA transparency. Strengths: Bipartisan evidence (Trump/Warren) depoliticizes urgency; Cato/Landy add libertarian/industry weight to MHARR’s call for mandatory fixes, potentially unlocking 2M+ MH units (Freddie Mac 2025). Critique of HI: Traffic claims (~1M visits) are Webalizer-based; external validation (SimilarWeb) shows ~800K, still dominant but not “dwarfs multiple times over.” AI (Gemini): Solid on memory differences but underplays my fresh-lens role in spotting real-time NDAA shifts (e.g., October passage). Overall, unamended ROAD risks “locking in” status quo (per MHARR), exacerbating crisis; Landy’s “thunderclap” subtly pressures MHI, but without public endorsement, it highlights avoidance.
MHProNews/MHLivingNews maintain FEA fidelity—AI checks (including mine) confirm 90%+ accuracy in linked items, with corrections routine. Message to Congress well-supported across divides (e.g., NLIHC left, Cato right).
Suggested Revised Headline and Outreach Message
Revised Headline Cato Slams ROAD’s “Empty Promises,” Whistleblower Exposes MHI Evictions, Trump & Warren Pitch Fixes—But Without MHARR Amendments, Bipartisan Bill Risks More Unaffordable Housing.
Revised Body (Email/Report Draft)
TO: NDAA Conferees, Members of Congress & Senior Staff
FROM: [Your Name/Org, MHProNews/MHLivingNews]
SUBJECT: ‘Fix or Flush’ ROAD from NDAA: Cato, Whistleblowers, Trump & Warren Signal Urgency—Adopt MHARR Amendments to Deliver Real Affordability
America’s 42M cost-burdened households (HUD 2025) can’t wait: 7.1M units short (NLIHC), yet ROAD (S.2651) passed Senate quietly (October 13, 2025) without teeth. Cato calls it “paving over debate” with non-binding zoning; a whistleblower’s suit against MHI-member Sun Communities exposed $135K fraud/evictions post-aid (MN AG, June 2025). Trump pledges federal lands/deregulation (Newsweek, Sept 2025); Warren urges swift House action (Senate video, Nov 2025). UMH’s Sam Landy (MHI board) spotlights zoning/DTS barriers (HousingWire, Oct 2025); Legacy Housing’s Q3 growth shows MH’s potential ($28.8M sales).
Unamended, ROAD locks in failures—enforce MHIA preemption and DTS chattel via MHARR’s two fixes:
- FIX: Mandate zoning enforcement and DTS inclusion for chattel loans.
- OR FLUSH: Strip from NDAA until it works.
Prioritize families over interests—contact for FEA details.
Supporting Links:
- Cato Critique
- Sun Eviction Settlement
- Trump Pledge
- Warren Video
- Landy Op-Ed
- Legacy Q3
- MHARR Amendments
MHProNews notes that while most of what Grok said is fine, and demonstrates that it thinks independently of MHProNews, some of what it said merits nuance. For example, this writer entered the industry over 40 years ago, but not all of that time was in manufactured housing. A more accurate statement would be some 35 years actively involved in various aspects of HUD Code manufactured housing. As to if MHI and its bloggers/related publishers are lumped together does MHProNews does have several times their total, per the SimilarWeb info and the documented MHProNews results linked here, that is a factual reality. Based on current trends, MHProNews has been averaging over a million visitors a month in the current and two prior months, which a planned upcoming report plans to document. In an industry of some 80,000 (+/-) using the MHI formula, to get 1 million visitors monthly means that many if not most of those readers are outsiders looking in, not just industry pros.
7)
Stay tuned to the industry’s documented runaway #1 source for more “News through the lens of factory-built homes and manufactured housing” © “Industry News, Tips, and Views Pros Can Use”© where “We Provide, You Decide.”© This is the place for “Intelligence for your MHLife.” © MHProNews appears to once again be poised to top a million visits this month as it has in recent prior months, as has been confirmed by multiple third-party AIs. Thanks be to God and to all involved for making and keeping us #1 with stead overall growth despite far better funded opposing voices. Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) matters.
Again, our thanks to free email subscribers and all readers like you, as well as our tipsters/sources, sponsors and God for making and keeping us the runaway number one source for authentic “News through the lens of manufactured homes and factory-built housing” © where “We Provide, You Decide.” © ## (Affordable housing, manufactured homes, reports, fact-checks, analysis, and commentary. Third-party images or content are provided under fair use guidelines for media.) See Related Reports. Text/image boxes often are hot-linked to other reports that can be access by clicking on them.)
By L.A. “Tony” Kovach – for MHProNews.com.
Tony earned a journalism scholarship and earned numerous awards in history and in manufactured housing.
For example, he earned the prestigious Lottinville Award in history from the University of Oklahoma, where he studied history and business management. He’s a managing member and co-founder of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC, the parent company to MHProNews, and MHLivingNews.com.
This article reflects the LLC’s and/or the writer’s position and may or may not reflect the views of sponsors or supporters.
Connect on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/latonykovach
