Like everything involving the law, there are ways of creating a defensible practice and there are things that would be difficult to defend. This industry has long relied on the fact that most residents are either too poor, or too ignorant, or both to exert their rights. All of that is changing and the pendulum is now swinging too far the other direction in response to some of the things our industry has done in the past. As a result, we often end up with laws that do not consider what you or I might feel is moral, just, or fair.
I, and most of our clients, do actively use a right of first refusal when selling a home for placement in our communities. It becomes defensible, by having the community pay out part of the purchase price in return for that right. Both this agreement and the right are carefully spelled out in a state specific agreement that was carefully crafted by competent legal counsel and NOT by Google, Google & Google.
The captive/related finance companies also make their offers to lend contingent on the home staying in the community until the loan is paid off. This only becomes defensible through carefully crafted verbiage in the purchase money agreement that shows a benefit to the borrower.
Basically, as any competent attorney knows, you cannot compel someone to give up a right without acceptable compensation. The method, and or value, of that compensation is something which must be carefully thought out if the agreement is to survive though a court battle.
Courts, legislators and others view us with suspicion already. If we are not careful, we will get more laws and more court decisions that make it harder for us to survive.