Foreclosures | HealthyCal
 

Posts Tagged foreclosures

  

Foreclosures causing human, fiscal pain

This piece is one in a series on the fiscal challenge facing California, produced in partnership with the Working Families Summit and the California Center for Research on Women and Families.

By Ronald Coleman

Hundreds of thousands of hard working families have lost their housing while millions of other troubled borrowers continue to desperately seek modifications so they can keep their homes. California continues to suffer from severe devastation from the economic crisis that was largely fueled by the collapse of the housing market. The state has come to be known as “ground zero” in the national foreclosure crisis due to rampant predatory lending and the sudden bursting of the housing price bubble.

State and local governments are taking quite a hit as well. At every level of government, budgets are being negatively impacted; severely hampering its functionality. Our education system is in shambles, public safety is being threatened, our roads are crumbling, and safety net programs are being slashed, at a time when people need them the most.

Bank foreclosures are costing our state and local governments billions of dollars –- money that could be spent on adequately funding the services that Californians value. State policymakers really ought to take a closer look at the damaging impact that foreclosures have on state and local budgets, and find ways to fill those gaps, while incentivizing modifications for troubled borrowers in order to further stabilize our economy.

It’s quite simple — Wall Street and the big banks crashed the economy. Then, Washington made $4.7 trillion available to those banks and corporations, who said that a “bailout” was absolutely necessary in order to save companies and stimulate the economy.

Banks were to extend credit to small businesses and entrepreneurs to create jobs while also providing relief to troubled homeowners to help them save their homes. Most of those small business owners and homeowners are still waiting for help or have already lost their businesses or homes.

The banks were bailed out and working families were sold out. Today, unemployment in California remains at 12.4% and 10,000 to 20,000 families a month continue to lose their homes. Local and state governments continue to struggle with record setting deficits, as those same banks continue to burden our state and local economies.

In a 2005 study by the Homeownership Preservation Foundation, it was estimated that each foreclosure generates between $430 and $19,227 in direct costs to cities. These costs come from code enforcement, increased police expenses due to increased crime, loss of utility payments and taxes, and also loss of property taxes when a borrower walks away from a property before a foreclosure.

Foreclosures are not just a problem for banks and borrowers. Foreclosures are a problem for all of us as taxpayers and it is time for our state government to develop a policy to offset these costs. Last year there were approximately 250,000 foreclosures in our state. If the California legislature placed a $20,000 fee on foreclosures at the time of a notice of default, up to $5 billion would have been generated that could have been used to mitigate the direct costs that a foreclosure places on governmental budgets. This fee could even be used as a hook to incentivize a loan modification if it could be returnable to a financial institution if a modification is given.

Year after year, state and local budgets have been primarily balanced on the backs of those who can least afford it. Instead of declaring war on the poor and public employees, or cutting the vital services we all value, our state leaders should really look at the devastating economic impact that has been created by the greed of the big banks, and the subsequent foreclosure crisis, and find ways to make the banks pay their fair share towards rebuilding California.

Ronald E. Coleman is Legislative Director for the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment.

 

Governor signs bill for borrowers, renewable projects

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed Senate Bill 401, which will extend a law that exempts homeowners who get mortgage debt relief from having to pay income tax on their savings as if it were a gift.

The law affects people who have been forced to sell their homes in “short sales,” where the bank holding the loan agrees to settle for the sales price rather than the full amount of the loan. Without this law, those borrowers would owe income tax on the difference between the sales price and the loan balance.

The bill, by Sen. Lois Wolk, also exempts from income taxes federal stimulus grants that are used for renewable energy projects.

 

New foreclosure rules blessed by Senate banking panel

Legislation to give California homeowners more protection as they modify their loans is moving through the state Senate. Senate Bill 1275 has won passage in the Senate Banking committee and is now headed for the judiciary panel.

Paul Leonard, director of the California office of the Center for Responsible Lending, calls the bill a “modest proposal” that would do a “world of good for Californians who are faced with losing their homes.”

The bill would require all lenders in California to follow procedures the Obama administration recently announced for lenders who are part of the federal Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). Among other things, those rules require loan servicers to evaluate a borrower’s eligibility for a loan modification before they begin foreclosure proceedings.

The measure would also require loan service companies to file a “declaration of compliance” certifying that the company has followed all state procedures required before foreclosing on a home. If the company does not file the notice or misrepresents its actions, those failures could be grounds for financial penalties or even reversing the sale of a foreclosed home.

The bill is being carried by Sens. Mark Leno and Darrell Steinberg.

 

Santa Ana foreclosure fix moving slowly

By Adam Elmahrek
Voice of OC

In January of 2009, during the height of the economic crisis, federal officials steered nearly $6 million to the City of Santa Ana to buy and restore foreclosed homes and provide down payment assistance to borrowers.

This home in South Santa Ana is among four previously foreclosed homes bought, fixed up and sold by the city of Santa Ana through grants provided by the federal Neighborhood Stabilization program. The city his happy with its progress since it first received money in early 2009. Critics, however, question the effectiveness of the program.

Santa Ana’s top housing official is happy with the results.

Yet since then, only five homes have new families, and only two borrowers have been helped. Five other properties are currently in escrow.

“We have approximately half our funds spent and I believe we are ahead of the game,” said Shelly Landry-Bayle, Housing Manager for the Santa Ana Community Development Agency. “So far, we are very satisfied with our progress.”

Some in Washington obviously agree with Landry-Bayle. In January, the city was given another $10 million from the U.S. Housing and Urban Development’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program.

But a local economist and a Santa Ana realtor think otherwise.

“They could have taken that money, dropped it from an airplane over Santa Ana and it would have helped more people,” said Donald Booth, Professor of economics at Chapman University.

'I think the program is too little too late,' said Phil Schaeffer, a Santa Ana realtor who has worked in the community for 20 years. 'The impact on the foreclosure situation has been negligible.'
The housing bust has clobbered Santa Ana. At some points in recent years the city has been home to as many as 1,500 foreclosures. The federal money is to be used to buy up foreclosed homes and multi-unit buildings, then refurbish and resell them so previously stable neighborhoods don’t become blighted. A smaller portion is set aside for down payment assistance.

“I think the program is too little too late,” said Phil Schaeffer, a Santa Ana realtor who has worked in the community for 20 years. “The impact on the foreclosure situation has been negligible.”

To date, Santa Ana has spent $3.1 million of its grant funds, according to HUD spokesman Brian Sullivan. The city has thus far provided Voice of OC with an accounting of $3 million of that spending. The money has gone, among other things, toward purchasing the homes, rehabilitation and administrative costs.

Also part of the $3.1 million in total spending was $1.4 million spent on the acquisition and rehabilitation of a 14-unit, low-income housing complex on Durant St. Rehabilitation of the housing complex is not yet complete.

Finally, $108,797 in developer fees was paid to ANR Industries, the Santa Fe Springs-based contractor that won the city bid to do the work.

Sullivan said Santa Ana is ahead of the curve compared to other cities involved in the program. However, Sullivan acknowledged, because the cities take out mortgages on the properties they purchase and refurbish, they have to compete with private investors for loans from banks.

Private investors are not bound by contingencies required by the program such as a 1 percent loan discount for the borrower and strict environmental regulations. “The bank asks itself, ‘who do I want to sell the house to? An investor that comes to me with cash, or a community that has all these obligations?’” Sullivan said.

At the rate the program is going now, it would take 10 years for Santa Ana to wipe out 10 percent of the foreclosure problem, Booth said.

In addition to the small number of properties fixed up, there has been confusion over responsibility for repairs that have been done by ANR Industries.

In at least one case, ANR Industries sold a condominium unit even though damage was obviously visible on the exterior of the home. An unsightly scar blemishes the stucco wall near the window facing the neighborhood, and the wooden fencing around the patio remains unpainted.

George Jordan, Vice President of ANR Industries, said exterior repairs like stucco damage and wooden fencing are typically the responsibility of the Homeowners Association.

“We always seek to correct as many of the issues as possible,” Jordan said. “We don’t always have the liberty to make those repairs.”
The HOA for this property, South Coast Terrace, has been struggling financially and halted any piecemeal property repairs, according to Board of Directors Member Wallace Rodecker. But Rodecker said ANR Industries could have made the repairs if it wanted to.

The down payment assistance portion of the program has also shown few results. Landry-Bayle said just two borrowers have taken advantage of the down payment assistance leg of the federal program. Obligations attached to down payment loans made through the program – complex terms for a borrower to negotiate for on his own – have stifled interest, Landry-Bayle acknowledged.

“It’s a little hard for someone with no experience negotiating discounts with banks to do so,” Landry-Bayle said. Despite the limited impact across the city, families that have moved into the refurbished homes said the program has made a difference in their lives.

Anthony Malfavon, 34, bought a home through the program and was ecstatic about what he called a piece of the American dream.

“I just feel truly blessed,” Malfavon said.

But experts like Booth and Schaeffer remain skeptical.

“You could have taken all that money and distributed it to 100 people and gotten them all nice homes,” Booth said. “So far, it looks like a complete waste.”

This story was produced by HealthyCal partner Voice of OC, a new online news site covering Orange County that will go live in March.

 
 
 

Home | Cal Health Report | Community Report | Legislation | Ideas | Forums | About Us

©2013 HealthyCal.org