In April 2026, the city of Fortuna, California, passed a rent stabilization ordinance capping lot rent increases at manufactured housing communities. Months earlier, Minnesota introduced a bill to cap lot rents statewide. Colorado already has tenant right-to-purchase laws that give residents 90 days to organize and buy the park when it goes on the market. Oregon requires 365 days notice before a park can close.

This is the regulatory environment that MHP investors are navigating right now — and most of them are doing it completely blind.

If you’re underwriting a mobile home park deal in 2026 and you’re not doing a deep-dive on the state and local regulatory landscape, you’re playing with fire.

The Regulatory Threat Matrix

Not all regulations are equal. Some are minor inconveniences. Others fundamentally alter the investment thesis. Here’s a framework for thinking about MHP regulation by category:

Tier 1 — Deal-Killers (Exit and Income Risk)

Rent control/stabilization: Any law capping how much you can raise lot rents directly attacks your NOI and your ability to mark rents to market. California is the worst — many cities have local ordinances on top of state law. These markets are essentially no-go for new acquisitions unless you’re buying below stabilized NOI and have a thesis that doesn’t depend on rent increases.

Tenant right-to-purchase (Right of First Refusal): In Colorado, California, and a growing number of states, when you decide to sell your park, residents have a statutory right to match any offer and buy the park themselves. This doesn’t prevent you from selling — but it adds 60-90 days to every sale process, creates uncertainty, and can spook conventional buyers.

Tier 2 — Operational Friction (Manageable but Must-Know)

Extended notice requirements for rent increases: Most states require 30-60 days notice. Some require 90-180 days. A few require annual caps tied to CPI. Know this before you buy.

Extended notice for park closure: Oregon: 365 days. California: 6-12 months minimum depending on local ordinances. North Carolina: 60 days. This matters enormously if your value-add thesis involves eventually redeveloping or selling the land for alternative use.

Just-cause eviction protections: Some states limit when you can evict a tenant beyond non-payment. This adds friction to problem tenant removal.

Tier 3 — Watch List (Active Legislation)

These are states where bills have been introduced but haven’t passed — yet. The regulatory trajectory matters as much as the current state of the law.

Active legislative threats as of April 2026:

• Minnesota (lot rent cap bill)
• New Hampshire (resident right-to-purchase discussions)
• Massachusetts (increased tenant protections under consideration)
• Nevada (various tenant protection expansions)

The Safe States for MHP Investing (2026)

The states where Keel Team concentrates its acquisitions aren’t accidents. They’re the product of deliberate state selection based on regulatory environment, demographic tailwinds, and economic fundamentals.

North Carolina — No statewide MHP-specific rent control. Landlord-friendly eviction process. 60-day park closure notice. Growing population, strong job market, affordable housing shortage.

Tennessee — Among the most landlord-friendly states in the country. No rent control. No right-of-first-refusal. Limited tenant protection laws specific to MHPs. Strong growth in secondary markets (Knoxville, Chattanooga, Clarksville).

Georgia — Landlord-friendly. No MHP-specific rent control. Growing population across metro and rural markets.

South Carolina — Low regulatory burden. Strong demand in coastal and secondary markets. Good cap rate environment.

South Dakota and Wisconsin — Landlord-friendly Midwest states with stable MHP markets, lower institutional competition, and no active regulatory threats.

These states aren’t just currently safe — they’re structurally resistant to MHP-specific regulation because of their political environments. Not zero risk, but managed risk.

Your Pre-Acquisition Regulatory Checklist

Before you sign a LOI on any park, run through these questions:

• Does this state have MHP-specific rent control?
• Does this state have a tenant right-of-first-refusal or right-to-purchase law?
• What is the required notice period for lot rent increases?
• What is the required notice period for park closure?
• Are there active bills in the state legislature that could affect MHPs?
• Does the city or county have local MHP ordinances more restrictive than state law?

This checklist takes 30-60 minutes per deal. It has saved operators from buying into regulatory traps multiple times — including deals that looked great on a pro forma but were sitting in cities actively pushing rent control ordinances.

The Bigger Picture: Why Regulation Is Accelerating

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: as institutional capital floods into MHP investing, the political pressure on the asset class intensifies.

When small, local mom-and-pop operators owned parks for 30 years and charged below-market rents, nobody paid attention. When private equity firms buy parks and raise rents to market rates, residents organize, call their state legislators, and demand protection.

That political dynamic isn’t going away. The smart strategy isn’t to pretend it doesn’t exist — it’s to:

• Focus acquisitions in structurally friendly states
• Monitor regulatory developments proactively
• Be a good operator (resident relations matter politically)
• Have an exit strategy that doesn’t depend on holding forever in any single market

The MHP asset class remains one of the strongest in real estate. But the operators who will thrive over the next decade are the ones who understand that state selection is investment strategy.

For a complete due diligence system used on 50+ acquisitions, check out the MHP Due Diligence Playbook at keelteam.com/mhp-due-diligence-playbook.

Keel Team acquires and operates mobile home parks in investor-friendly Southeast and Midwest states.