I Agree Secretary Geithner!

[US Treasury Secretary Timothy] Geithner said Wednesday the number of families that would benefit from principal forgiveness is significant. "Not overwhelming, but significant," he added. (American Banker, April 18, 2012)

I will admit I got an A in Economics.  I saw the principle of supply and demand in everything.  Now working in homeownership I still have the lens of supply and demand.  So Secretary Geithner’s comment that principal forgiveness would be significant is an immediate, ‘hell yes!’

In the mid to late 2000’s there were a lot of folks buying homes.  That means they bought at the height of the housing market and now likely live in a home with a value less than their mortgage amount.  It is called ‘underwater’.  I have a relative who bought in 2006 and his mortgage is almost 40 percent higher than the tax value of the property.  He is current on his payments, but after 6 years of payments, he has no equity to borrow against to do house repairs or improvements.  When his daughter is ready for college in 15 years, he will have some equity but not enough to pay for her tuition for the first year of college.

I decided to look at Portland Housing Center customers who bought during that same time period 2005 to 2009.  I started with Bank of America borrowers because I wanted to send them a flyer of an upcoming event in May hosted by Bank of America to assist homeowners.  For 188 Bank of America homeowners, I compared the property tax value against the original mortgage amount.  I found that 60 percent were ‘underwater’.  As near as I could tell 5 percent had a foreclosure; another 4 percent I grouped as unknown.  The remaining 31 percent had a home value that was greater than the mortgage amount.  They were the ‘overwater’ homeowners.

Imagine if my relative and the other 60 percent had principal forgiveness.  I assume that means more construction jobs since every home needs repairs.  I also think it means more houses for sale on the market.  Most people do not choose to do a short sale – which is another means to get principal forgiveness.  They wait for the market to improve.  When I hear that affordable homes in the $100,000 to $175,000 range have multiple offers and a house in Gresham had 36 offers, I know there are not enough affordable homes for sale.  If we had principal forgiveness, I bet there would be a lot more homes for sale as people traded up or across town or for another bedroom.  That means supply and demand and it is significant. 

'Get It' and Act!

At a recent symposium held by Stanford Graduate School of Business, studies were shared on ‘getting people to do good’. The context was recycling however the messages apply to any cause. One of the findings was to focus on good news and pair it with the broader philosophy of why the action is important. The pairing of good news and philosophy will help people to ‘get it’ and act.

Dr. Lisa K. Bates, of Portland State University and Portland Housing Center Board member, demonstrated that kind of messaging in her testimony to City Council on April 11th. The City Council is considering next year’s budget. The Office of Management and Finance recommended cutting all the homeownership education and counseling support. Homeownership advocates are asking funding support be continued and at $500,000.

The good news Dr. Bates told City Council was, “Through funding homeownership education and counseling, the City can ensure access to the benefits of homeownership is available to a broad spectrum of Portlanders –making these opportunities real for first generation buyers, moderate income households, women, and communities of color.”

The broader philosophy of why this is important according to Dr. Bates is “A thriving city is one that people both figuratively and literally ‘buy into’- owning a home as a commitment to community and an investment in the future. Owning a home gives people a tangible stake and an opportunity to benefit from economic development. Research shows that children of homeowners (even low income owners) have better health and do better in school and future employment.”

Now let’s hope City Council ‘gets it’ and reinstates $500,000 to fund homeownership education and counseling. If you ‘get it’ and want to act contact City Council and let them know you support homeownership services. Then join the Portland Safety Net and let everyone know.

It Is Sweet and Pink!

An article in the Wall Street Journal asks “For Women is Home Really so Sweet?” (February 18, 2012). The writer’s conjecture is women buying homes may be swapping one rite of passage, marriage, to another means of feeling settled by buying homes. It may be true that some women are choosing homeownership. As a single woman who bought her house twenty years ago, I didn’t consciously make the choice of homeownership over marriage, but I am still in my house and I am not married. I must say I am glad I made those choices. I like that my home’s value is 3 times what I paid for it and my loan is nearly paid off. I am not sure if the net monetary value of my partner has increased as much.

If homeownership is a ‘right’ of passage that is fine by me as long as it is an option. It wasn’t so long ago that a woman in the Portland Housing Center home buying class said she thought she needed a husband to be able to buy a home. Before 1981 and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act it was NOT illegal for lenders to discriminate based on sex or marital status. Then it had been necessary to have a husband to purchase a home. The former Mayor Vera Katz tells her story about buying her first home before 1981 as a divorced single mom. She was asked in the loan interview if she was using contraceptives.

I can appreciate the writer questioning why women make the decision to buy a home. But then she goes too far – “ . . . one that, as the housing crisis has proved, can too easily end in calamity.” Just when it is possible to dream about homeownership on one’s own, the writer throws the wet blanket – you’ll lose it, you’ll lose the home. That is fear mongering. Instead of promoting the fear, I wish the writer promoted quality home buying education and counseling, good loans, and women’s option to purchase regardless of whether it is a rite of passage or a desire to paint the walls pink and have a dog.

Don't forget the 'h' word!

I have listened to local politicians and public officials talk about what he/she is going to do to make Portland a better place to live. What I haven't heard is the 'h' word, homeownership. Why is it when house prices are at a 7 year low and interest rates on a 30 year mortgage are 4 percent, that none of them say, "buy a home"? If he/she so believes in Portland and its opportunities, then encourage people to buy homes and share the opportunities. When rents are on par with mortgage payments, then it makes common sense to buy a home. Furthermore, if politicians make all these improvements in Portland, then new homeowners will see their houses appreciate.

For years, I heard from media pundits and politicians say that homeownership wasn't such a good idea. Well it isn't a good idea if its a bad loan and no one checked to see if the borrower could afford it. Homeownership can be done the right way. And when it is, neighborhoods, families and cities all benefit because homeowners invest into the fabric and economy of Portland. But somehow that has gotten forgotten in the past few years. It is time for those running for offices and those in office to use their 'bully pulpits' and use the 'h' word. Take the fear out of home buying and remind people that Portland is home. Buy one.