I think this approach is misguided. I don't think artificially sustaining high housing prices is an appropriate response when what we really need is affordable housing. If we need affordable housing, we should focus on providing that instead of keeping people in houses they cannot afford. If people are being foreclosed on, they should be able to rent a smaller space in a different location for a price they can pay. If we need shelters for the homeless, let's expand that instead of providing inappropriately sized houses for people who would otherwise be homeless. I'm not advocating we throw people out on the street or create blighted neighborhoods -- we are far from both, in this area -- I think that the housing market needs to reset at a lower level, and foreclosures, while painful, are a major mechanism by which the market does that. If a bank is failing to maintain property to a minimum standard set by a city, local HOA or community organization, there should be a way to legally address this, as there would be with any homeowner. If the bank decides to sell it at a lower price, that's a GOOD thing; it makes housing more affordable for everyone. If the bank decides to raze the building and plant a field of wheat, or paint the house sparkly gold, and none of these decisions violate existing zoning laws or regulations -- that is their prerogative as the owner. If the foreclosure process is too slow, we should work on fixing that aspect and put these houses back on the market so that they're occupied, instead of stopping the foreclosure from happening in the first place. There's no incentive to fix these larger issues when we slap a band-aid on the situation.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: I'd like to know more about these cases.
Date: 2009-10-30 05:19 pm (UTC)I'm not advocating we throw people out on the street or create blighted neighborhoods -- we are far from both, in this area -- I think that the housing market needs to reset at a lower level, and foreclosures, while painful, are a major mechanism by which the market does that.
If a bank is failing to maintain property to a minimum standard set by a city, local HOA or community organization, there should be a way to legally address this, as there would be with any homeowner. If the bank decides to sell it at a lower price, that's a GOOD thing; it makes housing more affordable for everyone. If the bank decides to raze the building and plant a field of wheat, or paint the house sparkly gold, and none of these decisions violate existing zoning laws or regulations -- that is their prerogative as the owner.
If the foreclosure process is too slow, we should work on fixing that aspect and put these houses back on the market so that they're occupied, instead of stopping the foreclosure from happening in the first place.
There's no incentive to fix these larger issues when we slap a band-aid on the situation.