
Maine lawmakers consider bill to stop mobile home park sales for three months
Supporters say a pause on mobile home sales would allow lawmakers to evaluate a handful of mobile home-related bills, while also giving the residents of Friendly Village in Gorham a fair shot at purchasing their park.
But opponents argue the stoppage would infringe on the rights of private property owners, and one would-be seller said it could sink a sale that is critical to both him and his tenants.
Proposed by Sen. Chip Curry, D-Belfast, the bill would bar the sale of any mobile home park in Maine until Oct. 31. Because the bill is proposed as an emergency bill, it would go into effect immediately after passage, although it would require two-thirds majorities in both chambers.
Some supporters suggested adding an exemption for residents trying to purchase their parks, as well as an extension of the moratorium through the end of the year.
Curry told the Housing and Economic Development Committee that he updated the bill's language after hearing for months that the state is losing affordable housing to private equity investors looking to profit "and I would argue exploitatively" from low-income Mainers.
Curry proposed the moratorium "to give us time to catch up on the regulatory environment so we can best protect our most vulnerable members of the community," he said.
BILLS ON THE TABLE
Mobile home parks in Maine and across the county are increasingly being purchased by out-of-state investors who then raise the monthly lot rents, in some cases by two or three times, according to national data. An estimated one-fifth of Maine's 468 licensed parks are now owned by out-of-state investors.
Following passage of a 2023 "opportunity to purchase law," several communities, including those in Brunswick, Bangor and Monmouth, have formed cooperatives to purchase their parks. But more than twice as many have failed, even with offers just above those of the competition.
Lawmakers are currently considering several bills to protect mobile homeowners, including one that would give residents the "right of first refusal" to purchase their park when it goes up for sale.
Another would attach a hefty per-lot fee to the purchase of a community (on top of the purchase price) to be paid to MaineHousing to replenish a statewide program designed to help residents buy their parks. Resident-owned co-ops and affordable housing groups would be exempt from the fee.
Another bill would eliminate the real estate transfer tax on sales of mobile home parks to resident buyers.
The committee tabled two similar bills Tuesday that aim to prevent sudden and dramatic lot-rent increases.
Rep. Cheryl Golek, D-Harpswell, who proposed one of the rent control bills, asked that committee members consider a freeze on mobile home rents if they decide to push her bill to next session.
"These are people's lives that we're talking about," she said. "This is not a political, divided issue. We have hundreds and hundreds of people begging us ... to do something to protect them."
A TALE OF TWO PARKS
Dawn Beaulieu, a resident of Friendly Village for almost 30 years, said residents plan to submit an offer Monday — one that is higher than the $22 million offer from Crown Communities, the prospective buyer.
But many sellers don't want to give up a sure sale in favor of an offer from residents who may struggle to pull the money together.
"(The moratorium) would give us the amount of time we need to put a good faith motion forward with financing, to show them that they're still going to get what they're looking for," Beaulieu said.
Nora Gosselin, director of resident acquisitions at the Cooperative Development Institute, said she's watched the Legislature this session approach the "complicated issue of mobile home park preservation with huge creativity and thoughtfulness." The institute assists residents who are trying to buy their parks.
The bill, she said, would weave together the committee's work with Friendly Village's "Herculean" organizing efforts to buy the park.
"A moratorium on large park transactions will allow the protections crafted by this committee ... to kick into effect in time to benefit the almost 300 households at Friendly Village," she said.
But Michael Oneglia, the owner of two parks in Belfast, said the bill could kill a deal that he has spent tens of thousands of dollars and more than 10 months trying to close.
Oneglia is under contract to sell Seacoast Village, a 22-lot park, and Hyland Estates, a 68-lot park, and is set to close in the coming weeks. Residents were not interested in purchasing the parks, he said, so he proceeded with a private sale.
But if the moratorium goes into effect, "I will absolutely lose my buyer," he told the committee. "I have a personal situation where I need to sell and this will really screw things up for me and my tenants."
If the deal falls through, Oneglia said, he would have to cut back the parks' services to just the essentials, dramatically lowering the standard of living for his tenants, who will pay the same amount of money while he recovers from the financial hit.
"I just can't believe we're even at a point where we're talking about a moratorium of the sale of a private piece of property," he said. "It seems un-American and it's completely inappropriate."
'MORE HARM THAN GOOD'
Others who opposed the moratorium bill, including many park owners like Oneglia, said a moratorium could devalue their properties and risks being an unconstitutional taking of property.
Tina Marie Smith, vice president of State Manufactured Homes in Scarborough, said the bill was "created with unsubstantiated hysteria" and that it and the provisions being considered in the other bills threaten the future of their industry.
She asked that legislators not paint all park owners with the same brush and consider families like hers who have owned the same park for generations.
"You're systematically trying to remove what we all thought would be a generational legacy," she said. "I consider all of the legislation that has been unleashed upon us to be extremely one-sided."
Sandra Hinkley, president of the Manufactured Housing Association of Maine and the owner of Maple Hill Estates, a 110-lot park in Mechanic Falls, said a moratorium would be "nothing short of imprisonment" for community owners in Maine.
That bill, along with the other mobile home-related bills being considered, would punish people who have provided affordable housing in the state for decades, "threatening our property rights, devaluing our businesses and setting a precedent that the state can choose when and how we sell our businesses and to whom," she said.
Hinkley suggested that if legislators are concerned about losing affordable housing, they work with MaineHousing to provide funding for park owners looking to expand.
"(The moratorium) will do more harm than good and does not address the real objective, which is to create more housing," she said.
Copy the Story Link
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
NBA Escrow System Slashes Player Salaries Nearly $500M for 2024-25
The NBA just wrapped its accounting on the 2024-25 season and pegged basketball-related income (BRI) at $10.25 billion, according to someone familiar with the accounting who was granted anonymity because the details are private. It's a key number for players, as it determines how much of their salary they get to keep from last season. The news is not great for players, as they will forgo more than $480 million from the escrow fund set aside to make the math work in the shared-revenue system laid out in the collective bargaining agreement between players and the league. Advertisement More from Stephen Curry gets dinged the most as the NBA's highest-paid last season at $55.8 million—he also made an estimated $100 million off the court. Curry will forgo $5.1 million, and other players taking big haircuts include Joel Embiid ($4.7 million), Nikola Jokic ($4.7 million), Bradley Beal ($4.6 million) and Kevin Durant ($4.5 million). The CBA calls for players to receive 51% of BRI. The NBA withheld 10% of player salaries last season to ensure that the revenue split was achieved. Overall revenue likely came in light due to some combination of the choppy local media environment and multiple small-market teams among the last ones standing in the playoffs, which dented postseason gate receipts. Players will ultimately retain 90.9% of their salaries for the 2024-25 season, as the 10% escrow was split 91% to teams and 9% back to players. A player with a $20 million salary would net $18.2 million before taxes and agent fees. Bleacher Report's Eric Pincus first posted about the escrow split on X. Advertisement The escrow system, implemented during the 1999 CBA, was traditionally set at between 8% and 10% of player compensation. Players and the league split the escrow for many seasons, but for three straight seasons beginning with 2014-15, 100% of the escrow was returned to players along with a supplemental check as revenues surged and produced an uneven split. When COVID-19 hit in March 2020, the league raised the escrow percentage late in the season to 25% to account for the shortfalls in arena revenue. The following season, a 'ten-and-spread' system was implemented to supplement the standard 10% withholding amortized over three years. There was still a carryover of around $130 million going into the 2022-23 season, but players received nearly 100% of their salaries that season when revenues jumped. The NHL has a similar escrow system that was often a major point of contention for players and agents, and the scales typically tipped towards the owners when final accounting was completed on hockey-related revenue. The escrow system cost NHL players at least 10% of their paychecks for six straight seasons leading into COVID, when the withholdings soared even higher. Yet, the hockey business is booming, and the league stopped withholding escrow payments for the 2024-25 season in January, with the expectation that the escrow fund would fully revert to players. The newfound harmony between the NHL and its PA was on display last week when it reached a new CBA a year ahead of the expiration of the current one. Advertisement NBA players should be clear to collect their full 2025-26 salaries. The salary cap, based on projected BRI, was set at $154.6 million, up by the maximum 10% allowable increase, per the CBA. The 10% bump was inevitable after the league signed new 11-year media agreements with NBC, ESPN/ABC and Amazon last July worth $77 billion, which is roughly 160% higher than the previous average annual value. Best of Sign up for Sportico's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

a day ago
Which Republican senators voted against Trump's agenda bill and why
President Donald Trump's tax cut and spending bill came down to the wire as Senate Republican leaders scrambled to get all GOP members on board before the final vote Tuesday. In the end, three long-serving GOP members, Susan Collins of Maine, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Thom Tillis of North Carolina voted against, forcing Vice President JD Vance to break a 50-50 tie. Each of the three has explained their reasons for bucking the president. Susan Collins One of the mostly closely watched as the vote neared was Collins, who had been on the fence due to the bill's proposed Medicaid cuts. "Approximately 400,000 Mainers – nearly a third of the state's population – depend on this program," she said in a statement after voting no. "A dramatic reduction in future Medicaid funding, an estimated $5.9 billion in Maine over the next 10 years, could threaten not only Mainers' access to health care, but also the very existence of several of our state's rural hospitals." Collins added that the bill had "additional problems." "The tax credits that energy entrepreneurs have relied on should have been gradually phased out so as not to waste the work that has already been put into these innovative new projects and prevent them from being completed," she said. Thom Tillis Tillis has been extremely vocal in his opposition sine the weekend, drawing attention for a passionate floor speech citing Medicaid provisions he claimed would hurt his North Carolina constituents. During a closed-door GOP conference meeting two weeks ago, Tillis is reported to have made the point that Medicaid coverage for more than 600,000 North Carolinians would be at risk under the Senate's proposal and asked his colleagues to consider how the policy would affect their own states -- even providing state-specific data on a handout. "I just encouraged other members to go to their states and just measure how ... take a look at the proposed cuts and tell me whether or not you can absorb it in the normal course of business, and in many cases, you're gonna find that you can't," Tillis told reporters at the Capitol last week. Trump lashed out against Tillis on his social media platform and to the press and threatened to field primary challengers. Tillis announced on Saturday that he would not seek reelection. Rand Paul Paul, a staunch advocate for keeping spending and the debt ceiling in check, posted on X that he wanted the bill to include a 90% reduction in the ceiling. "No earmarks. No handouts. Just real fiscal reform. I wasn't looking for favors. I wasn't horse-trading. I was fighting for the American people and against our out-of-control debt," he said. "Bottom line: I offered my vote for fiscal sanity. Congress chose to sell out taxpayers instead. Only once the bill is released, we will know what the true price was," Paul added.

Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Susan Collins votes 'no' as Senate approves Trump budget bill
Jul. 1—Sen. Susan Collins on Tuesday voted against President Donald Trump's marquis budget bill that would cut $1 trillion in health care and food assistance while strengthening border security and extending tax cuts that disproportionately benefit wealthy Americans. Collins was one of three Republicans to vote against the bill, which included a $5 trillion increase to the debt limit. But her opposition was not enough to stop the bill. It led to a 50-50 tie, which was broken by Vice President JD Vance. Collins' support for the bill was in doubt Tuesday morning after the Senate voted against her amendment to increase taxes on the ultra-wealthy and build up an emergency fund for rural hospitals expected to lose billions of dollars in Medicaid funding. Prior to the final vote, Collins told reporters in Washington, D.C. that she continues to have "serious reservations" about the bill. They include proposed cuts to Medicaid, which provides insurance for about 400,000 Maine residents, or one out of over four Mainers. "I truly don't know what's going to happen," Collins said Tuesday. "I have some serious reservations about the bill. I'm going to wait until we're done (to) know what direct direction we're going in before announcing my decision." Collins, who is the only New England Republican in Congress, is up for reelection next year. And Democrats have already pounced on her decision to vote in support of advancing the bill over the weekend, despite concerns that it could force rural hospitals to reduce services or close altogether. Trump's so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" seeks to extend his 2017 tax cuts, which predominantly benefited the wealthy and are set to expire at the end of the year, while increasing spending on national and border security and slashing safety net programs. The bill would cut about $1 trillion from Medicaid and food assistance and is expected to add more than $3 trillion to the national debt. Collins voted over the weekend to advance the bill, helping it clear the a key procedural hurdle by a 51-49 vote, but she has not committed to supporting it. Her vote is among those being closely watched in the Senate. Republicans hold 53 seats and can only afford to lose one more vote and still send the bill back to the House for additional consideration. Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Thom Tillis of North Carolina have already come out against the bill. Tillis announced he would not seek reelection. Collins made her case on the Senate floor late Monday during a so-called vote-a-rama, where Democrats forced votes on a series of amendments, including several efforts to eliminate cuts to Medicaid, which is estimated to cause 11.8 million to lose their health insurance, including 60,000 Mainers. Collins said her amendment would have doubled the $25 billion included in the bill to help rural hospitals cope with the cut in Medicaid and expand the list of eligible providers to include community health centers, nursing homes, ambulance services, skilled nursing facilities and others. The increase would have been funded by allowing Trump's tax cuts to expire on the wealthiest Americans — families earning more than $50 million and individuals earning more than $25 million. "Rural providers — especially rural hospitals and nursing homes — are under great financial strain right now, with many having recently closed and others at risk of closing," Collins said. "When these facilities shut their doors, the people they serve are often left without access to health care. This amendment would help keep them open and caring for those who live in these rural communities." The Senate rejected the amendment by a 78-22 vote shortly after midnight. It was supported by 18 Republicans, including Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. U.S. Sen. Angus King, a Maine independent who caucuses with the Democrats, also supported the amendment. Murkowski is also being closely watched and is under intense pressure from Senate leadership, who have tried to sweeten the deal by providing additional concessions for her home state, including exempting Alaska from having to pay a greater share of benefits provided under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Collins and Murkowski were the only Republicans to support an amendment from Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington that sought to eliminate a provision that would prohibit Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funding for health care services provided to low-income women. The amendment failed, 51-49. King, meanwhile, has firmly opposed the bill, saying during a press conference last week that it was "the worst, most regressive and most harmful piece of legislation I have ever seen," and that he had "no choice whatsoever but to vote 'no' on this bill." He reiterated his opposition in a floor speech over the weekend. He called on the Senate to kill the bill and draft a new one that maintains tax breaks for working families, while allowing those breaks to expire for people earning more than $400,000, which would eliminate the need for cuts to the safety net, including food assistance. King said the bill could lead to the closures of up to five hospitals in Maine. "All this damage to give a tax break to guys making a million bucks," King said. "It is a shame. And it's embarrassing to even be debating this bill." Republicans are hoping to meet a self-imposed deadline of sending the bill to Trump's desk by Friday. If approved, the budget would have to go back to the House, which passed its own version of the bill on June 22, with both Rep. Jared Golden, D-2nd District, and Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-1st District, opposed. This story will be updated. Copy the Story Link