46° and Clear
Dear Senators, Representatives, and concerned citizens:
In just a few weeks our country will engage in the most important election process we have... that of selecting our next President.
Soon after that the 2025 New Mexico legislative session will be upon us and the daunting task of again introducing legislation, reviewing proposed bills and ultimately making decisions... hopefully in the best interest of New Mexico citizens.
In 2023 SB298 was introduced. A bill that would have brought needed changes to the New Mexico Mobile Home Park Act, 1983. (MHPA) Unfortunately the arguments from park owners and real estate lobbyists against the bill resulted in the committees' action to table the bill effectively killing it.
In 2025 hopefully, again, legislation will be introduced to address the needed changes to the MHPA. If so, I'm confident that some of the same objections to the bill will be raised once again by park owners and real estate lobbyists. These same or similar arguments are smoke and mirrors that tend to mislead and/or misinform committee members reviewing the proposed changes to the MHPA.
Let's look at some of the arguments against the proposed changes in SB298, 2023, voiced by lobbyists.
First, (Applicability) It's important to understand what and who the MHPA applies to. The MHPA applies to those mobile home parks that have 12 or more spaces for rent wherr the homeowner owns the home and rents the lot space the home is situated on. The MHPA does not apply to or affect rental properties in general... as some of the lobbyists' comments appeared to imply.
Thus, the scope of the applicability of the MHPA is very specific including any proposed changes to the Act.
Second. (Rent Control) One of the arguments against rent control was it would adversely affect "new investments in affordable housing." Once again, that comment has virtually nothing to do with parks subject to the MHPA. Why? Because park owners are NOT bringing new manufactured homes into the parks. Park Residents either move their already owned home into a park, or sometimes purchase an existing park resident's home that is for sale.
Another argument against rent control was it would financially inhibit park owners from making improvements in the parks. Improvements? What improvements? Our park generates over $600,000 annual revenue to the California owner
It took several of our residents begging the New Mexico Attorney Generals' office to get involved to get our water leaks repaired, and we're still waiting for the repairs to be done. We used to have a full-time maintenance man. That position has been eliminated by the owner
The website "Mobile Home University" emphasizes as an attraction to investor groups to buy parks... raise rents and reduce services to increase profit margins because our homes are NOT mobile in reality.
There is no oversight or enforcement of the current MHPA. Two months ago I had a Zoom meeting with the AG's Chief of Staff, Taylor Bui, and the Deputy Attorney General, Julie Meade. I was told that the AG's office has no directive to oversee or enforce the MHPA. Thus violations, or other issues reported to them associated with the MHPA... we're told to "go hire an attorney.
SB298 would have provided a clear directive to the AG's office to provide oversight and enforcement of the MHPA to include fines up to $5,000 for violations of the MHPA. Opponents of the bill argued that there was no enforcement needed and fines up to $5,000 were draconian and unnecessary. The current MHPA has a $500 fine provision. Do you think our California owner who receives $600,000+ in annual revenue is concerned about a $500 fine.
Really? The fact that lobbyists argued fiercely against oversight and increased fines is a clear indication they know violations of the MHPA are being committed against park residents
Otherwise, why would you be concerned about fines and penalties
If you operate the park in accordance with the law(s) you don't have to worry about a fine or penalty.
New Mexico is severely behind other states who have recognized what is happening with out-of-state investor groups buying parks, increasing rents, eliminating services, and violating applicable laws.It is time to stop "buying" the lame arguments of park owners and real estate lobbyists who don't care about senior park residents. Owners who are employing predatory business practices of increasing rents with no maximum caps that force some residents to sell their homes or even lose their homes. Owners who violate provisions of the MHPA , and know they can because our AG doesn't have a "directive" to enforce it or take action or fine them for their illegal actions against park residents.
It is time that New Mexico recognizes the seriousness of the situation just as other states have, and takes the appropriate and morally ethical course to protect senior park residents.
Respectfully,
Gary Perry
