July 07, 2008

Councilor Rosen Responds

Received thius e-mail from Councilor in response to how passage of the current home rules petition regarding foreclosure will help. Thanks Councilor Rosen.




Federal, state and municipal governments are taking steps to begin to put a tourniquet on the hemorrhaging of foreclosures in this country. The US Senate is working diligently on a $300 billion foreclosure rescue program. The Massachusetts legislature is considering foreclosure legislation similar to home rule petitions submitted by both Boston and Worcester. Lawmakers see the need to address this national crisis, which has had a devastating effect on both poor and middle class homeowners and renters. While many of these mortgage loan problems were brought about by predatory and unscrupulous lenders, others were the result of a lack of information, legal assistance, and common sense by some individuals and families who did not realize or who ignored how difficult it would be for them to make ballooning ARM mortgage payments in the future.

The Worcester City Council, on an 11-0 vote, rather than wait for the Commonwealth to pass the foreclosure legislation in front of it, seeks to take action similar to that already proposed by the city of Boston. Our Home Rule petitions request a 6-month moratorium to slow the tidal wave of foreclosures and give homeowners a little more time to get the right advice and make the best decisions in an effort to save their homes. They request that tenants and families who, through no fault of their own, are in danger of being evicted have some reasonable protections through a just-cause eviction process. And finally, they ask that homeowners be given their day in court just in case judicial steps and intervention can realize a new agreement between homeowner and lender. Perfect legislation? No. But helpful to Worcester, its homeowners, residential and commercial taxpayers, I think and hope so.

Besides homeowners and tenants, their children and extended families, having their lives seriously disrupted, neighborhoods often become blighted as foreclosures occur. As soon as the boarded windows spring up, the economic and emotional well-being of the entire neighborhood goes down. and the safety, economic and emotional well-being of the entire neighborhood can be compromised. Squatters sometimes take up residence, houses are vandalized, copper tubing removed, and windows shattered. Often the lender is oblivious to the condition of the property that they now own. Values and demand for surrounding properties in which neighbors have significant investments go down. Further, the economic ramifications of foreclosure include the loss of tax revenue; increased policing, fire department activity (due to arson), and an increased need for social services.

Worcester has been especially hard hit by the foreclosure tsunami. I understand that some homeowners have brought their troubles upon themselves by making unwise and uneducated decisions. However, many homeowners have fallen victim to a drastic change in career and financial status while others were prey to predatory lenders. In any case, the legislation which Worcester is proposing hopefully will offer some help, some relief and some time to homeowners, tenants and mortgage lenders so affected by this national crisis.

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

Bill:

Did you get me a comb?!?!?!??!?!

:-)

Harry Tembenis
Worcester, MA

Anonymous said...

I'm still bothered by the fact that this bailout is gonna cost me and other responsible consumers money to help those people.
Sure I understand the economic implications for the real estate market, neighborhoods, people lives etc... The fact is the majority of those affected knew the risk... now we're all gonna pay. It ain't right!
Will

Bill Randell said...

I agree with the Councilor when he says there are too many foreclosures in the City of Worcester.

Lets take the example, however, of a squatter in a house. In these cases alot of time the owner has simply walked wihtout securing the house. The bank can not do anything since they are not the owner. Now with this new ordinance the bank can not initiate the foreclosure for six months in essence helping squatters find readily available abandoned ownerless properties.

I feel bad for tenants caught in the middle, but the last thing a bank wants is tenants. Even if the foreclosure is delayed, the will evict tenants when they take ownership.

If anything a faster foreclosure process that would get the hands back into a private party, who would want a good tenant, may in the end give the underlying tenant a better chance of keeping their apartment.

I feel bad for these tenants and the neighborhoods effected, but I fail to see how putting a moratorium on foreclosures will make the situation any better. If anything I still think it will only make the situation worse.

Bill

Bill Randell said...

What if a person buys a three decekr and wants his or her family members to move into the other two floors?

Assume this means that you can not evict any of the tenants that are paying rent for six months?

Anonymous said...

Bill Randell said...
"What if a person buys a three decekr and wants his or her family members to move into the other two floors?"

That gets written into the purchase and sale agreement (the the premises be vacant upon transfer)

Anonymous said...

Your Honor, the prosecution asks the court to strike most, if not all, of witness Rosens response as non responsive and/or not relevant.

Prosecution furthers asks the courts indulgence to re-call this witness for future cross examination.

This response is a complete comb-over of the real issues and problems

Anonymous said...

Jahn;

I would have to agree with you in regards to the real issue...to many speculators, bad property owners, investors who only manage low income housing, un-qualified buying in the city..not enough stable folks...like many other communities have buying in their communities..we take in all of the low income housing because few others are interested in the city..I have used this as an example but the beautiful bldg at the cornah of Piedmont & Chandler is always quiet..few in the bldg work..always see pizza delivery boys coming and going..almost everyone there just waits for the check to come in the mail..WCG did a nice job to an ole dame of a bldg...it's just a shame that it isn't full off productive folks

Bill Randell said...

Steve:

Thanks for the real estate lesson, but if there is a local ordinance passed that does not allow you to evict a tenant for other then cause then it makes no difference what is in the Purchase and Sale. That is my point.

Bill

Bill Randell said...

Councilor Rosen, Jahn, Paulie and Steve all make good points and I understand how people want to do something. My arguement is that maybe doing nothing is the best thing and let the market take care for itself.

Back to my example, lets assume someone makes an offer ask for the tenants to be out of the house in the Purchase and Sale. The underlying owner then tries to end the tenancy, but if he can not evict without cause what is he suppose to do?

I do not see how either of these ordinances make the bad siuation any better?

Anonymous said...

Bill, I think you're missing my point.

If I am buying your building, I write a clause into the P&S stating that the building must be empty.

If it's not empty, the sale does not go through, and you're still stuck with it.

Banks will usually not accept a P&S with any such clauses written in. They have their standard P&S and are not willing to accept any changes, so the only thing you can negotiate is the price.

Normally, having a three decker with three tenents will drop the value by around $20,000 (three units x $1000/month x 6 month + legal fees). The city is not chopping another $20,000 off the value by extending that by six months.

My point is that not only does this NOT help anything, it's hurting property values, and lowering the tax base in the process.

Anonymous said...

The city is now chopping another $20,000 off the value by extending that by six months.

Anonymous said...

"Fed'l, state, & municipal gov'ts are taking steps to put a tourniquet on the hemmorrhaging of foreclosures in this country" Isn't a tourniquet only a temporary measure and once removed the bleeding continues? If the fed'l & state are taking steps, then why does the city have to do anything?

"US Senate...working on a $300B foreclosure rescue program" Then why do we also need a municipal fireclosure program?

"Mortgage loan problems were brought about by predatory and unscrupulous lenders" Not quite. Mortgage loan problems were brought about by those who use their real estate as an ATM machine and who never, ever think more than one week in advance. Please witness the Audi's & Lexus's & Escalades with $5,000 rims all purchased with "cash out money" and all parked in front of foreclosed properties.

...."others (subprime mortgages) were the result of a lack .....common sense. SO why should the city come to the aid of those who lack common sense? Also, please witness the skating rink construction as an example of a lack of common sense.

".... 6 month moratorium to slow the tidal wave of foreclosures & give home owners more time .....to get advice.....and make best decisions...to save their homes" Three deckers worth only $195,000 that have $340,000 mortgages are beyond saving. Please GIVE ME A LIST OF the SPECIFIC advice & SPECIFIC efforts.

".....tenants & families..........(should) have reasonable protections through a just cause eviction process." Tenants & families already have a just cause eviction process in Housing court, which housing court and laws are very, very, tenant friendly in Mass.

...homeowners & tenants.......having their lives seriously disrupted..." what difference does it make if they are disrupted now or 6 months from now?

......neighborhoods often become blighted as foreclosures occur. As soon as boarded up windows spring up..." Please be advised the Worcester City council (after the Cold Storage fire) pushed the state to enact legislation requiring boarded up windows.

".....ramifications of foreclosures include the loss of of tax revenue....fire dept activity..." The city doesnt lose any tax revenue due to foreclosures. Any unpaid property taxes accrue interest at 12% and are paid in full by either the foreclosing bank or the new owner. Frankly, to the contrary, unpaid property taxes are a huge revenue generator, as where else can one get 12% on their money. Fire dept activity??? So what?? These guys are just watching cartoons or sleeping anyway or preparing the bid on their next masonry job or house painting bid or dreaming up ways the city is screwing them.

Mr Rosen, your response is always appreciated but it s/b more on point. I am surprised that a businessman would take the position that you have. You get a C-. Also, sir, if your were the holder of a mortgage on a troubled property and you were about to lose 10's of thousnads of dollars...would you consider yourself the victim or would you consider the Lexus driving homeowner the victim?

I do agree the tenants are sometimes caught in the middle....but often tenants who dont pay their rent are THE problem.

I truly hope all this legislation dies over the summer or never makes it way out of the conference committees.

Anonymous said...

Christ Almighty! Now we're going to debate if our Yellow Boxes s/b painted brown or yellow?

This reminds me of 20 years ago when the Fire Dept painted their trucks yellow.............only years later to go back to painting them red again. God, it's like the ditzy bimbo who cant make up her mind what clothes look good on her so she buys 5 blouses and then returns 4 of them.

Maybe I missed it.............but i didnt see any SPECIFIC numbers as to how many drug users needle(s) were deposited....or was there just one??

How much money are we spending monitoring these things?

How do we discern a drug users "deposit" vs a non drug users "deposit" ? Are we paying someone to sit and watch these things all day ?

If these collection boxes re main vacant or substantially vacant should we board them up and file legislation that places a moratorium on removing them.....or should we put a big red "X" on them indicating possible dangerous contents?

Time to kick this box habit or place a tax on it. I am actaully in agreement with Mr Billy Breault on this issue.

Bill Randell said...

Steve:

Exactly!!!! We all agree there is a problem, but none of these ideas help anything. In fact I would argue that they make the situation even worse.

The key here that you need to understand is that banks are not jumping to start foreclosure. They are trying to work with people not to foreclose. As a last resort, however, they do.

If we delay this for six months, we are only drag out the process even longer. The other thing we need to understand is what effect these ordinances will have in Worcester in an already tight credit market?

I would not want to lend money knowing on the back end that I can not foreclose, the original note may be reviewed and I can not evicy tenants without cause.

Bill

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the city will exempt themselves from this legislation....... i.e. they can foreclose w/o a 6 month cooloing off period.

For those who may not be aware......the city is a BIG guarantor in the low income housing market all over Main South

I believe they may also be lenders as well.

How much you want to bet it will not apply to the city.....they'll make it so it apllies only to those in the lending business.......efeectively excluding the City..........nice huh..........

Anonymous said...

Steve dont forget to add in the $4,000 per flat that it costs to physically have a tenant and their belongings removed by the sheriff & and a bonded warehouseman.

Squaters typically dont move on their own.

Oppsss add another 10,000 to replace the copper they'll proably take with them.

Add $18,000 more if the place is aluminum sided.....you'll have to re side it too