‘A thunderclap unpacking UMH CEO Sam Landy’s statements defines the failure metric’ in ROAD to Housing Act

UMH CEO Sam Landy should be thanked for sharing via HousingWire his recent op-ed which weaves together what is arguably a subtle call for the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) to do what the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) called for amendments to the ROAD to Housing Act 2025. Consider carefully what Landy did and didn’t say in: Manufactured housing is the future of affordable housing. Landy asserts: “Manufactured housing offers a proven, scalable path to affordable homeownership—if policymakers remove outdated barriers.” Landy’s fact-laced argument includes the points that manufactured homes allow households to buy with less than half the income and for potentially hundreds of thousands in lower total costs than conventional ‘site built’ housing.

Landy specifically cited the “Road to Housing Act.” He laid out points the well-informed would know that the ROAD bill – unless amended as MHARR encourages – won’t fix.

Examples, quoting Landy.

“Federal mortgage agency loan programs (FHA, RHS, VA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac) can also help. These programs fund 65% of all new mortgages (Page 8, Urban Institute Mortgage Chartbook). But, combined, they did not fund a single personal property manufactured home last year. This disconnect comes even as personal property homes constitute some 70% of the manufactured housing market.

Local communities across the nation can also help with affordable manufactured housing. Unfortunately, all too often, communities adopt discriminatory zoning ordinances that unfairly exclude manufactured housing. This needs to change.”

For example, UMH has experienced this in Coxsackie, New York, where Village officials repeatedly rejected well-planned designs for a community, and eventually resorted to re-writing the Village zoning code to prevent UMH from building any manufactured home community on the property that it had purchased for that purpose.

Among the facts or terms not specifically mentioned in Landy’s op-ed? The words “Manufactured Housing Institute” (MHI) is not mentioned, even though Landy is now a member of the MHI board of directors.

Per MHARR.

“These bottlenecks and the failure to address them in the ROAD to Housing bill, were detailed in an MHARR analysis entitled “A Critical Analysis of the U.S. Senate ROAD to Housing Act of 2025,” which was widely distributed to the industry and other interested individuals and companies on August 14, 2025. Those unaddressed major bottlenecks are:

• (1)   The proliferation of zoning mandates that discriminatorily exclude or unreasonably restrict the placement of HUD-regulated manufactured homes; and
• (2)   The failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to implement the statutory Duty to Serve Underserved Markets (DTS) with respect to the nearly 80% of the manufactured home consumer finance market represented by personal property (chattel) loans.”

Landy has been an attorney for decades. Per sources deemed reliable, he is a regular reader of industry and other news. He knows that without millions of more HUD Code manufactured homes the affordable housing crisis in the U.S. can’t be solved and without the MHARR amendments, the ROAD bill will fail to fix the housing crisis. It is his job to know that MHARR’s two points above would solve the issues he named via HousingWire, cited above.

The timing of Landy’s op-ed is noteworthy.

By accident or design, Landy waited until he joined the board of directors of MHI.

Among the facts-evidence-analysis (FEA) checks by multiple third-party artificial intelligence (AI) systems, was the following findings by Gemini.

• “Landy’s statement defines the failure metric (“did not fund a single personal property manufactured home”). MHI’s actions, or lack thereof, on mandatory legislative fixes (like those advocated by MHARR) are the mechanism that allows this failure to persist. MHI’s posture aligns with the rhetoric of Landy, but its behavior in Washington aligns with preserving the market structure that leads to Landy’s stated failure.”

Copilot said this.

• “MHI: Silent publicly on MHARR amendments/DTS urgency. Paywall hides advocacy…”

Per Grok.

• “MHI Sincere Effort on ROAD Act per MHARR? None Evident
• MHARR’s Aug 15 white paper demands amendments to Senate-passed ROAD Act 2025 (e.g., enforce DTS chattel, avoid chassis removal pitfalls). MHARR White Paper”

From that MHARR White Paper.

• “MHARR President and CEO, Mark Weiss, stated: “While MHARR welcomes the removal of the statutory ‘permanent chassis’ mandate for new manufactured homes, we are disappointed that our colleagues at the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) – ostensibly the ‘lead’ industry organization advancing the manufactured housing-related aspects of this legislation – apparently allowed crucial deficiencies to be incorporated within the legislation while simultaneously omitting the most serious bottlenecks that have thwarted the industry.” Weiss continued, “Hopefully MHI will step forward and seek remedies to these issues as the legislative process unfolds.”

MHI’s CEO, Lesli Gooch, is on record providing remarks akin to MHARR’s in a letter to then HUD Secretary Ben Carson.

Democratic lawmakers with Secretary Mel Martinez (R) and a Republican lawmaker with Secretary Marcia Fudge (D) are on record calling for enforcement of what is commonly called “enhanced preemption” made law under the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000.

That power under the 2000 Reform Law to overcome local zoning barriers has only rarely been invoked by HUD. Congress held oversight hearings in 2011 and 2012 that both MHI and MHARR indicated they wanted HUD to enforce.

So, why is “enhanced preemption” missing from MHI’s website?

Why isn’t MHI pressing Congress to enforce existing laws that board member Sam Landy has effectively drawn attention to via HousingWire?

Who benefits from the status quo which is all but guaranteed to continue if the ROAD to Housing Act isn’t amended as MHARR has called for if not the consolidators that dominate the MHI board?

That is Landy’s de facto thunderclap. As an attorney, Landy doubtlessly knows that if federal preemption was enforced that Coxsackie, NY development he referenced would not have been blocked.

“There are many kinds of journalism, but at the heart of their constitutional responsibilities, journalists are in the business of monitoring and keeping a check on people and institutions in power.”

– The American Press Institute.

If MHI is serious about returning manufactured housing to historic robust growth, the course of action is clear. Get Congress to amend the ROAD to Housing Act to fix the issues MHI board member Sam Landy brought to light.

Tony Kovach is the co-founder of ManufacturedHomeProNews.com and ManufacturedHomeLivingNews.com. 
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: [email protected].