Residents and owners spar over bill to clarify rent rules for manufactured-home communities

Representative Rich Haggerty, House chair of the Joint Committee on Housing, convened a hybrid hearing focused in part on manufactured‑housing legislation that residents and owners say will shape affordability for thousands of households across the Commonwealth.

The most contested measure, House Bill 14‑75, would alter how communities set base lot rents. Supporters, including Andrea Knowles, an attorney who represents Hometown America, said the bill provides guidance after the Supreme Judicial Court’s decision in Blake. “The S.J.C. found … that charging tenants different rents based on the time they enter into a community is presumptively unfair under the Manufactured Housing Act,” Knowles told the committee, and she said HB 14‑75 “is very narrowly tailored to resolve the disruption and uncertainty that Blake caused.”

Opponents — residents, local elected officials and tenant advocates — urged the committee to oppose HB 14‑75. Paula Fay, who identifies herself as a commissioner on the Manufactured Home Commission and a resident of Oak Point in Middleborough, said the bill “negates the purpose of manufactured homes, and it significantly impacts the quality of life for the residents,” and alleged the measure is being pressed by an out‑of‑state corporation to avoid accountability in pending litigation. Multiple Oak Point residents described significant disparities in rents for the same services and said litigation is already under way.

Several residents described how large investors and private equity firms buying communities have changed operations and raised fees. Former Senator Chico, a longtime author of manufactured‑housing reforms, said investor purchases are increasing pressure on residents and urged the committee to consider an omnibus bill that would prioritize resident protections and affordability.

Representative Carol Doherty (referred to in testimony as Representative Hawkins and others), who said she represents several manufactured‑home communities, told the committee she has received hundreds of constituent messages opposing HB 14‑75 and described residents’ fear that the bill would allow unequal rent increases that would fall hardest on seniors and people on fixed incomes.

Groups representing owners also testified. Melissa Karan, executive director of the Massachusetts Manufactured Housing Association, said communities “function as self‑contained, unsubsidized entities” that provide services and infrastructure that would otherwise fall to municipalities and said several protections already exist, including CPI‑based limits, capital pass‑throughs and judicial review. She said the trade association opposes rent‑control style proposals (S‑990 / H‑15‑13) but supports H‑14‑75 as clarity for owners.

Committee members asked presenters about litigation, the Blake decision, and the feasibility of equalizing rents at parks where rent structures have varied for years. Supporters of tenant oversight boards (S‑990 / H‑15‑13) said local boards would add transparency and local review; owners’ representatives warned the proposals could create inconsistent local regimes and administrative burdens.

The hearing produced no committee votes. Testimony and written materials were requested by committee staff. Members said they will accept additional written testimony and may consider combining language across bills. The committee also heard parallel testimony on insurance costs, acquisition transparency, and the possible need for an omnibus approach to address multiple challenges at once.

Documents and testimony filed for the hearing include opposing filings from residents at Oak Point and written submissions from Hometown America’s counsel and the Massachusetts Manufactured Housing Association.