Revealing what two former presidents/CEOs of the Manufactured Housing Institute said undermines the stories
There is a widespread story that has been circulating for years in what we affectionately call MHVille. According to that story, the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) represents “all segments” of the factory-built housing industry. To quote MHI, they are: “Leading advocates” for manufactured housing. MHI’s homepage tells the gullible: “We are your trusted partner, advocate and industry leader.” A casual look at the MHI website may look a lot like other professional association websites. Only when informed people take a closer look does a different reality than they claim begin to emerge.
Under ‘Issues and Advocacy’ on the MHI website it states: “MHI is the federal policy voice for all segments of the off-site housing industry and serves as the industry’s leading advocate on federal and legislative matters. MHI ensures that the industrial housing industry speaks as a unified voice in Washington.” With these thoughts in mind, a series of facts and quotes from former MHI presidents and CEOs, combined with data from the recreational vehicle and manufactured home industries, sheds sobering light on the Arlington, Virginia-based trade association’s bold claims.
In an interview with The Wall Street Transcript (TWST), the following question was asked of then-President and CEO of the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI), Chris Stinebert. “Its all these problems [that depressed manufactured housing sales] almost over?MHI’s Stinebert said: “I would have to say yes. Inventory levels are very good and back to balanced levels. The high loan repossessions of the 1990s that plagued the sector have returned to manageable levels. The performance of loans originated in recent years continues to improve. Underwriting guidelines and terms for home financing have improved dramatically, to the extent that some believe there has been an overreaction and tightening and that some creditworthy buyers or customers do not have the option of purchasing a manufactured home, but can easily qualify for a site-built home. But there are other positive factors as well.”
That was 2004, when the entire industry produced only 130,748 new HUD code houses. Fast forward to 2015.
MHI President and CEO Richard “Dick” Jennison said the following to dozens of industry professionals in video recordings at the Louisville Manufactured Housing Show.
“Why not half a million“New manufactured homes are sold every year,” Jennison asked rhetorically. ‘We can get therethe CEO of MHI assured his listeners.
For context, in the mid-1990s, the manufactured housing (MH) industry produced 2,033,545 new HUD-coded homes between 1995 and 2000. That’s an average of about 338,924 new manufactured homes per year for six years.
According to the latest data from the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) in November 2025: “Just released statistics indicate that HUD code manufacturers produced 7,203 new homes in November 2025, a 16.2% decrease from the 8,597 new HUD code homes produced in November 2024. Cumulative production for 2025 now stands at 95,938 new HUD code homes, as compared to 96,236 in the same period in 2024, a decrease of 0.3%.” From 2021 to 2024, the industrial housing industry produced 411,137 new homes. That’s just over 102,784 new homes per year over the most recent full four years.
So the sector performed 3,297x higher on an annual basis a quarter of a century ago, when the population was smaller then now. While that comes up occasionally, why isn’t that data a routine statement of fact in mainstream reporting on the affordable housing crisis?
Next, let’s compare the insights into manufactured housing versus the RV industry. From 1995 to 2000, the RVIA reported that there was an average of 1,663,104 or 277,184 new RVs per year. The industrial cottage industry averaged more than 18 percent higher production totals compared to RVs shipped in those years. Fast forward to the years 2021 to 2024. When manufactured housing produced 411,137 new homes, the RV industry shipped 1,740,415 new units of all types (towable and motorized). This means that RVs lagged behind production homes by about 18 percent between 1995 and 2000. But between 2021 and 2024, RVs outpaced manufactured housing by 4.23 to 1.
4.23 new RVs are shipped for every new home manufactured.
Campers are discretionary for most people, or a ‘luxury item’.
Manufactured homes, on the other hand, are affordable housing need for approximately 22 million Americans.
But if anyone reads pro-MHI commentary, either directly from MHI or from bloggers/trade media who are MHI members and parrot MHI’s talking points, you would think that the industrial housing leaders at MHI are doing a great job. But if that’s the case, why is the industrial housing sector still only running at about 27 percent of its last high in 1998?
In November, HousingWire published an evidence-packed op-ed quoting MHI board member Sam Landy, JD
Landy explained that zoning and financing barriers prevented manufactured housing from reaching its potential. That’s oddly similar to the terminology of “bottlenecks” that MHARR has said for years limits the true potential of manufactured housing. Maybe that’s a coincidence, or maybe Landy compared what MHARR said to what MHI says and does?
What is clear from HousingWire’s op-ed is that it has received no known public reprimand from Landy. Landy is the leader of the multi-billion dollar operation UMH Properties, so he certainly has the ability to issue a press release at any time.
According to legal sources related to the pending antitrust litigation in the manufactured housing industry MHProNews: “We plan to file an amended complaint no later than January 26.” Time will tell, but there are reasons to believe those lawyers be able to expand their pleadings in a way that more directly points the legal finger at MHI as an integral part of their pleadings. If so, read it here first. As a HousingWire op-ed stated: “MHI is the apparent trade group being referenced [Judge] Valderrama and plaintiffs. MHI no longer publicly lists its members, but according to a previously published list by MHI that can be found here, 8 of the 11 defendants are MHI members.”
The stark difference between the supply of RVs and the production of manufactured homes since 2000 raises several questions.
• Given that the industrial housing companies and senior MHI staff leaders are well-trained, seasoned veterans, how is it possible that they have failed to take legal action to enforce existing laws that could cause an increase in new home sales and thus production?
• MHARR remains focused on calling for robust enforcement of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act and its “enhanced preemption” provision. MHARR calls for full implementation of Duty to Serve (DTS) manufactured housing.
• On paper, MHI also says that it supports federal “enhanced preemption” and DTS. But in recent years, MHI has been pretending that MHARR does not exist and has been working with conventional housing groups. Logically, if MHI were serious about enforcing the “enhanced preemption” provision of federal law, which could overcome the zoning and siting barriers that limit sales and therefore production, why hasn’t MHI partnered with MHARR?
• When at least two MHI members asked the Biden-Harris (D)-era FHFA to enforce DTS for property lending, why didn’t MHI join MHARR?
AI-powered Copilot, after reviewing the elements of the report linked here, said the following.
“A bona fide housing agency would…
O Used the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 as intended.
O Forced Duty to Serve implementation.
O Fight against discrimination in the field of zoning plans.
O Protected independents.
O Expanded access for consumers.
O Grow the industry back to its proven capacity.”
MHI reportedly accepted MHARR’s offer in 2019 to file a lawsuit to enforce the federal preemption.
According to Mark Weiss, JD, president and CEO of MHARR.
“MHI’s emphasis on the legislation currently under consideration – as I pointed out in my response to your first question – essentially misses the boat.” Certainly, we would all like to see the “permanent chassis” mandate removed from the law. It is anachronistic and limits or makes certain installation configurations more expensive, where manufactured homes could provide a cost-effective solution for more Americans in increasingly diverse locations and areas. But that in itself is low-hanging fruit and not a real or significant challenge from those who want to suppress the mainstream housing industry or suppress (or eliminate) it as a competitor in the housing market.
Without defending the NAHB, it is understandable that they fight for the interests of conventional builders.
But what’s harder to understand is why MHI’s core members seem more focused on consolidation and “optics,” as UMH’s Sam Landy has said their business model delivers higher returns, and that UMH does this without “predatory” behavior. This means an argument can be made that state and federal investigators, plus curious mainstream media reporters, should investigate MHI and their consolidation-oriented brands. Who says? Multiple artificial intelligence (AI) systems known for their pattern recognition capabilities.
When the draft of this article was provided to AI-powered Gemini for a fact-evidence analysis (FEA) check, Google’s AI said: synthesis of these two datasets Criticizing the effectiveness of trade associations is currently nowhere else to be found. The “4.23 to 1″ outperformance ratio of RVs over manufactured homes appears to be an original analytical finding of this design.” Gemini also said: “The [op-ed] correctly notes that while the population has grown, the “necessary” industry (MH) has shrunk, while the “discretionary” industry (RV) has expanded significantly.” ##
Tony Kovach is a managing member of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial staff and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: [email protected].
Related
#Comparing #data #private #manufactured #housing #sheds #critical #light #Americas #affordable #housing #crisis