OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Attorney General Opinion No. 15-IB04
June 29, 2015
VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL
Mitch Crane, Esquire
Chairman
Delaware Manufactured Housing Relocation Authority
110 Main Street, Suite G
Camden, DE 19934
Dear Mr. Crane:
In your letter of April 28, 2015 (the “Request”), on behalf of the Delaware Manufactured Housing Relocation Authority (“DMHRA”),1 you asked for an Opinion of the Attorney General on the question of whether the Delaware Manufactured Home Relocation Trust Fund (the “Trust Fund”)2, a fund administered by DMHRA pursuant to the Delaware Manufactured Home Owners and Community Owners Act (The “Act”)3, may be used to assist the relocation of homes within the same community.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
By way of factual background, the Request4 indicates that DMHRA is currently considering and approving Trust Fund assistance applications for residents of two particular
manufactured home communities5. Each community filed for a “change of use”6 of a defined portion of the community, but the “majority” (or at least some significant portion) of each respective community remains unaffected by the contemplated change of use. In each community there are homeowners who have applied for relocation assistance from the Trust Fund and qualified for such assistance.7 The DMHRA Board apparently became aware of several homeowners in the two communities who were required to relocate, and who chose to relocate to properties within sections of the same communities that were not subject to the contemplated change of use instead of relocating to a different community.
BASIS FOR AN OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
We issue this opinion pursuant to our statutory authority “to provide legal advice, counsel and services for administrative offices, agencies, departments, boards, commissions and officers of the state government concerning any matter arising in connection with the exercising of their official powers or duties.”8 We note that an Opinion of the Attorney General is not a formal adjudicative fact-finding, and instead is a non-binding advisory opinion to the requesting party.9
LEGAL ANALYSIS OF RELEVANT STATUTES
This question of whether the Trust Fund may be used to assist the relocation of homes within the same community requires an analysis of the statutory construction of two particular provisions in the Act: 25 Del. C. § 7012(b) and 25 Del. C. § 7013(a).
25 Del. C. § 7012(b) outlines the two permissible purposes for expending money in the Trust Fund: (1) To pay the administrative costs of the Authority; and (2) To carry out the objectives of the Authority by assisting manufactured home owners who are tenants in a manufactured home community where the community owner intends to change the use of all or part of the land on which the community is located . . .” (Emphasis added).
Section 7012(b) expressly states that objectives of DMHRA are to be carried out by assisting homeowners in a community the community owner intends to change the use of “all or part of the land on which the community is located.” On its face, Section 7012(b) expressly contemplates that a partial change in use of land may give rise to a request for homeowner relocation assistance from the Fund.
25 Del. C. § 7013(a) provides that “[i]f a tenant is required to relocate due to a change in use or conversion of the land in a manufactured home community as set forth in § 7010(b) of this Title and complies with the requirements of this Section, the tenant is entitled to payment from the Trust Fund of the lesser of: (1) [t]he actual, reasonable expenses of moving the manufactured home and existing appurtenances to a new location within a 25-mile radius of the vacated manufactured home community including, but not limited to, the cost of taking down, moving and setting up the home in a new location; or (2) [t]he maximum relocation payment, which must be established by the Authority’s board of directors.” (Emphasis added). Section 7013(a) again expressly states that Trust Fund assistance can be used to cover the costs of moves within a 25-mile radius, and further provides that reimbursement is based on actual moving costs.
In interpreting a statute, a Court or other reviewing authority must “determine and give effect to legislative intent.”10 Under Delaware law, “[i]t is well settled that statutory language is to be given its plain meaning and that when a statute is clear and unambiguous there is no need for statutory interpretation.”11 If there is ambiguity in the text itself, however, the Court interprets the statute in a manner “that will promote its apparent purpose and harmonize with other statutes.”12
The statement in 7012(b) that Trust Fund assistance can be provided to manufactured home owners who are tenants in a manufactured home community when there is a contemplated change of use of “all or part of the land on which the community is located” clearly contemplates that a partial change of use is a permissible basis for a homeowner to seek Trust Fund Assistance. The plain language of the statute is clear and unambiguous on its face, and it is likely not necessary to look beyond Section 7012 to answer the question posed in your Request.
If, however, we further look to Section 7013, and particularly to the underlined language stating that the Trust Fund will cover moves within a twenty-five mile radius, the plain language of the statute appears again to be clear and unambiguous on its face, and can easily be harmonized with the language in Section 7012.
CONCLUSION
We conclude that the Trust Fund may be used to assist a homeowner with the relocation of a home within the same community if the tenant otherwise satisfies the statutory and regulatory qualifications for assistance. We see no indication in the plain language of the statute that the General Assembly intended to limit the availability of such funds to situations where a homeowner relocates a home to a different community.
Very Truly Yours,
/s/ Meredith Stewart Tweedie
Meredith Stewart Tweedie
State Solicitor
cc: Matthew P. Denn, Attorney General
Danielle Gibbs, Chief Deputy Attorney General
Suzanne Lantz, Executive Director, DMHRA
Dorothy Boucher, Board Member
Andy Strine, Board Member
William Dunn, Board Member
Joelle Polesky, Delaware Department of Justice (Non-Voting Board Member)
George Meldrum, Board Member
FOOTNOTES
1 25 Del. C. § 7011 (establishing DMHRA). The General Assembly established DMHRA in 2003 “to provide financial assistance to tenants and landlords in manufactured home communities who may be required to relocate, abandon, or remove manufactured homes under a variety of circumstances.” Ridgewood Manor II, Inc. v. Delaware Manufactured Home Relocation Authority, 2014 WL 7453275, *1 (Del. Ch. Dec. 31, 2014).
2 25 Del. C. § 7012 (establishing the Trust Fund).
3 25 Del. C. Ch. 70, Subchapter I (the Delaware Manufactured Home Owners and Community Owners Act); see also 25 Del. C. § 7027 (“This subchapter governs a change in use of a manufactured home community, as described in § 7010(b) of this title, to any use other than a conversion of the community to a manufactured home cooperative or condominium community …”).
4 While the publicly available Minutes of the April 28, 2015 meeting of the DMHRA Board reflect that this Request was submitted following a review by, and consent of, the DMHRA Board, our office subsequently learned that there may be additional relevant facts that are were not fully reflected in the Request. In response to my letter of June 25, 2015 requesting clarification of the facts giving rise to this dispute, three DMHRA Board members provided supplemental information. The supplemental information confirmed that the Request accurately characterizes the disputed legal question that is the subject of this Opinion.
5 See 25 Del. C. § 7003(12) (The term “manufactured home community” means a parcel of land where 2 or more lots are rented or offered for rent for the placement of manufactured homes. Manufactured home community is synonymous with ‘mobile home park,’‘trailer park’ and ‘trailer court’”).
6 The Act does not define the term “Change of Use” that is referenced in the Request, but does contain several references to “change in use” and “change of use”, which appear to be used interchangeably. See, e.g., 25 Del. C. § 7010 (b)(1) (Explaining a landlord’s options and obligations in connection with terminating a rental agreement “if a change is intended in good faith in the use of land on which a manufactured home community or a portion of a manufactured home community is located and the landlord intends to terminate or not renew a rental agreement” and using both “change of use” and “change in use”).
7 The procedure for qualifying for Trust Fund relocation assistance is set forth in 25 Del. C. §§ 7010-7011 and the implementing regulations. See 1 Del. Admin. C. § 201 (Regulations establishing criteria for Trust Fund benefits eligibility, application procedures, application review procedures, and payment procedures).
A landlord must comply with the statutory procedures for written notice to tenants and to DMHRA upon termination of a rental agreement for “an intended change in the use of the land of a manufactured home community as set forth in [§ 7010(b)]; see also 25 Del. C. § 7010(b) (landlord shall notify DMHRA and tenants in writing when “a change is intended in good faith in the use of land on which a manufactured home community or a portion of a manufactured home community is located and the landlord intends to terminate or not renew a rental agreement”). Once the written notice of change of use is issued, Homeowners must qualify for assistance pursuant to the criteria set forth in the Act and its implementing Regulations.
8 29 Del. C. § 2504(2).
9 AFSCME v. State Dep’t. of Finance, 288 A.2d 453, 455 (Del. Ch. 1972) (An opinion of the Attorney General is advisory and non-binding).
10 Eliason v. Englehart, 733 A.2d 944, 946 (Del.1999).
11 See State v. Skinner, 632 A.2d 82, 85 (Del.1993); see also 2A Norman Singer & Shambie Singer, SUTHERLAND STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION § 45:2 (7th ed.2014).
12 Eliason, 733 A.2d at 946. See also Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. SIG Growth Equity Fund I, LLLP, 80 A.3d 155, 157 (Del. Ch. 2013) (“There is a presumption that the General Assembly carefully chose particular language when writing a statute, and this court will not construe the statute to render that language mere surplusage if another interpretation is reasonably possible”) (footnote omitted).
<< Back
