Affordable Housing in California-Manufactured Homes?

It’s clear that more education is needed for an understanding of the term Affordable Housing.
The term “Affordable Housing”, what is it and what does it mean to us?

Can Warren Buffet be wrong? He purchased ‘Clayton Homes’ Manufacturing.
Manufactured housing, or so-called mobile homes, are less expensive by far in the past, now, and probably long into the future, per the construction and appraisal experts. Here is a sample of manufactured housing building costs compared to stick-built homes, 2 bdrm./2bath:

Manufactured Homes ----approximately $25-$45 per square foot to build.
Stick-built Homes --------approximately $75-$200 per square foot to build.

Housing Cost Comparison
Manufactured: Approximately $300/mo. to $1200/mo. space rent
Apartment: Approximately $900/mo. to $2200/mo.+
Condo: Approximately $900/mo. to $2200/mo. - plus HOA fees
Residential: Approximately $1200/mo. to $3000/mo.+

Value in Marketplace
Manufactured: Approximately $50,000 to $100,000
Apartment: Approximately $90,000 to $220,000
Condo: Approximately $100,000 to $300,000
Residential: Approximately $150,000 to $400,000

These numbers will vary from City to City, Park to Park, etc. The next area is where “who you work for” provides a different viewpoint, depending on who is asked. According to HCD people in Sacramento, when asked the question “Is an existing manufactured home counted as affordable housing as part of the 5-yr. housing plan?” Answer, “Yes, but.......” (Don’t you just hate “Yes, but” answers!)

What came out was the following:

a) Cities have probably more than one plan, i.e., State, City, County, Re-development.

b) Whichever plan(s) is/are spoken of, there is the referral to ‘Law’ that only new homes to be built are counted toward the purposes of meeting increased demand for affordable housing.

c) The law, contained in more than one publication, is very clear. “Affordable Housing cost is 30% of income.”

d) The law, also has a number of formulas that start with the ‘median income’ of the area. This is where the homeowner, retired, living on Social Security, home paid for, and ‘in-place’ for the duration, could not come within a country mile of that formula -- even the 50% of income, etc. Do the math yourself.

(e) The intrusion of government is seen again here. Although counted as “Affordable Housing” now and in the past, the government views our existing homes as needing re-hab, etc., so that the need for New Affordable Housing can be increased --- justifying construction of higher cost, higher density, higher tax revenue, higher City Re-development activity.

By any measure, our manufactured homes are the epitome of AFFORDABLE HOUSING. Our homes are counted, now, in the past, and for the foreseeable future as Affordable Housing. The use of taxpayers’ money to ‘subsidize’ the over-built government waste called ‘new affordable housing’ is not necessary. In a short time, the subsidy could buy and/or re-hab many of our manufactured homes.

Better yet, build more Parks! Ones where the home and land are one. We all know there is a HUGE STORM coming with Baby Boomers retiring. I just don’t get why the Cities, Counties, and State entities don’t get it. They know we are here!! They don’t seem to even count existing seniors and Veterans. What’s up with that??

Mobile-Home Residents Make Buy-out Offer, Laguna Beach

http://www.lagunabeachindependent.com/2011/09/16/mobile-home-residents-buy-out/

Belt Boyce, right, along with another resident, for years have tried to organize a buyout of the park.

Residents of a 130-unit mobile home park have for the first time made a formal offer of $41 million to buy the property when and if it’s sold.

The potential sale of Laguna Terrace Mobile Home Park at 30802 South Coast Highway has percolated for years, delayed by litigation and contested decisions.

Sean Schlueter, a 10-year resident spearheading the purchase offer, sent park neighbors a copy of the letter of intent, which was agreed upon and signed by Boyce Belt, the park association president. Seventy-three residents supported submitting the letter to the park’s owner, Stephen Esslinger; 18 opposed.

“This is a letter of intent to see if we have a willing seller,” said Schlueter. “The interest rates are as low now as they’re ever going to be. We’ll never know unless we ask. At least our hat’s in the ring.”

The offer is good until Oct. 6, Schlueter said, who added that he and the nearly 400 park residents expect a written response.

Schlueter owns his mobile home on the hill across Coast Highway from Treasure Island beach park and would like to buy the lot beneath its wheels. So do 54 percent of the park’s other residents. Schlueter was a founding member of the park’s association, which he said was established to purchase the mobile home park and convert it to a nonprofit, resident-owned property. Park residents agreed to the idea four years ago. This is the first time a formal offer has been made to Esslinger because earlier ownership was in contention among family members.

Esslinger, whose grandfather developed the park, has proposed subdividing the property for individual purchase, but that plan has been stymied by the California Coastal Commission due to a question over lot lines and natural waterways.

The purchase price is based on a 2007 appraisal of the property, according to documents. Schlueter said all leases will be protected and lot purchase is not required to continue renting at the mobile home park.

Belt said he expects a response from Esslinger or his attorney, Boyd Hill, within the next two weeks. Esslinger and Hill did not return phone calls seeking comment nor did the park’s general manager, James Lawson.

Oceanside: Let's DEFEAT DeRent Control...

Friends and Neighbors,

Kern, Felien and Feller tell us to move on, take our homes and go somewhere else. Forget the fact that our home is not mobile. Now there are more challenges for those of us that have chosen to downsize our world, as we move to retirement and a community of close knit friends.

With insensitive and politically polarized word bites coming from our local Oceanside Council members, FFK, it is difficult to read what is happening to those in similar communities now face, like in the story below.

If we do not Defeat DeControl in June, and cannot win the hearts and minds of our Oceanside neighbors, then the future for our golden years is dark indeed. Rather than give up, it is now the time to work together, to bring our friends and neighbors into the fight. Together we can make this a victory. We need to confirm that old folks count; That Old Folks Vote; and that we have influence in our community. Oceanside homeowners have a voice, and we can make ourselves heard.

Resident purchase of Manufactured Home Parks in Oceanside

Not widely known, but well-documented, supported by the U.S. Supreme Court, California Legislative Counsel, and State Attorney General, is a win-win-win-win solution for Oceanside's Affordable Manufactured Housing.

The Residents can own the land under their homes at a housing cost no more than what it is today. Compensation for the owner of the land "must equal fair market value of the owner's leased Fee interest", per the U.S. Supreme Court. No financing is required from the City of Oceanside. The Citizens/Voters will not have to bear the threatened, unnecessary litigation.

The homeowners will enjoy a stabilized housing cost, with conventional financing. Being forced to pay for the 150% Gorilla of sub-prime loans through a Bond issue is eliminated. The City can do away with the litigation cost associated with Rent Control. It, for all practical purposes, will disappear.

The land owner will receive far more than if the 'so-called' subdivision process if pursued. The City Resident/Voter can enjoy a local government functioning as it should. This is all public information that our "Mobile Home Owners Forum" has compiled over the years. Why isn't it being used?