Committee advances bill to limit lot-rent hikes in manufactured-home communities, 15-11

The Housing & Community Development Committee voted 15-11 to report House Bill 1250, legislation the bill’s prime sponsor said would cap routine lot‑rent increases for manufactured‑home communities and add new protections for residents.

House Bill 1250 would tie annual lot‑rent increases to the consumer price index (CPI), allow community owners to seek increases above 4 percent by submitting a financial summary to residents for review, extend certain notification deadlines, and explicitly protect residents’ ability to hold group meetings without interference, according to the committee staff description.

Representative Jim Hambridge, the bill’s prime sponsor, told the committee that manufactured‑home communities provide affordable homeownership for more than 55,500 Pennsylvanians and that the current ownership structure—residents own homes but not the land—leaves them vulnerable to sharp lot‑rent increases. “Investment companies are making profits at the expense of some of Pennsylvania’s most vulnerable populations,” Hambridge said, and he asked members for a “yes vote.”

An owner who identified himself as Chairman Mao and said he operates a mobile‑home community testified in support of the bill, describing recent private‑equity purchases of parks and steep rent hikes. “I am one of those big bad mobile home community owners that’s supposed to want to get every dime out of every tenant I can. I am not,” Mao said, adding that residents are often “trapped” because moving a home is costly and vacant lots are scarce.

Several members said they sympathize with residents but remain divided on the policy approach. Representative Irvin said he appreciated the bill’s aims but is “not able to support this legislation at this time,” arguing the bill could create problems for community owners who have treated residents fairly and could deter investment. Representative Probst said he is “in 100% support of this bill,” adding that the measure allows modest routine increases while providing a path for higher increases when needed for repairs.

Other members raised practical concerns. Representative Rosie told the committee she has parks in her district with aging septic and water systems and said state environmental fines or “tagging” by the Department of Environmental Protection could force owners to make expensive repairs or even close parks, displacing residents. When Representative Jamie Walsh asked whether the specific examples of dramatic rent hikes cited by the sponsor were tied to major capital work such as sewer replacements, Hambridge responded, “I don’t have that information.”

Representative Schaefer said she supports the bill’s provision protecting residents’ ability to form rental associations and suggested cooperative ownership as an alternative in some areas. Representative Siegel used the debate to urge broader action to increase housing supply through zoning and permitting reform, saying supply is crucial to long‑term affordability.

After discussion, committee staff took a roll call and the committee reported the bill as committed by a 15‑11 vote. The committee did not record a motion maker on the floor during the transcript; the vote record in committee roll call lists 15 yes votes and 11 no votes. The committee did not specify the next docket or floor schedule in the transcript.