This $2 Billion program, announced a few months ago to great fanfare but little result, has determined it’s time to expand the programs due to it’s thus far limited reach. The program is designed for low and moderate income borrowers who refinanced their home, took out a home equity line of credit (HELOC), or are underwater on their loans and now find themselves in trouble (duh). The program features four separate sections to help these borrowers including one to get caught up on their loan, another to reduce their principle, one to provide relocation and transition assistance and one to subsidize payments to unemployed homeowners.

Administered from a federal grant by the California Housing Finance Agency, the programs director says they started slow by design. Before jumping in with both feet they wanted to guage the response, see what kind of people were applying and why they were not qualifying. The director expects the program ultimately to help 100,000 Californians.

Of course as I noted in an earlier post when the program was announced, the program is voluntary for lenders. Yeah, you read that right. Lenders will voluntarily agree to accept partial back payments or reduced principle for borrowers who took cash out of their homes during the boom times. Low to moderate income buyers, who are in financial trouble. Yeah, the banks haven’t demonstrated much pro-activity in helping anybody at all, let alone low to moderate income folks. I’m sure this will all work out fine. Even the director admits that ‘only some lenders are participating’. Go figure.

Oh well, I guess if we can keep 100,000 low to moderate income people in their homes here while other demographic groups are ignored by HAMP and HAFA and other bail-outs, that’s a good thing, eh?

High down payment requirements being proposed by federal regulatory agencies as part of the upcoming rulemaking under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act will unnecessarily burden homebuyers and significantly impede the economic and housing recovery, according to the National Association of Realtors®.

Six agencies, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., Federal Housing Finance Agency, Federal Reserve, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, are developing a proposed risk retention regulation under the Dodd-Frank Act that requires lenders that securitize mortgage loans to retain 5 percent of the credit risk unless the mortgage is a qualified residential mortgage (QRM); FHA and VA mortgages would also be exempted. The purpose is to create strong incentives for responsible lending and borrowing.

“As the leading advocate for home ownership NAR supports a reasonable and affordable cash investment requirement coupled with quality credit standards, strong documentation and sound underwriting,” said NAR President Ron Phipps, broker-president of Phipps Realty in Warwick, R.I. “A narrow definition of QRM, with an unnecessarily high down payment requirement, will increase the cost and reduce the availability of mortgage credit, significantly delaying a housing recovery.”

NAR believes that Congress intended to create a broad QRM exemption from the 5 percent risk retention requirement to include a wide variety of traditionally safe, well-underwritten products. Congress chose not to include a high down payment among the criteria it specified in the Dodd-Frank Act to guide the regulators in defining a QRM. Strong evidence shows that responsible lending standards and ensuring a borrower’s ability to repay have the greatest impact on reducing lender risk.

“We need to strike a balance between reducing investor risk and providing affordable mortgage credit. Better underwriting and credit quality standards have greatly reduced risk. Adding unnecessarily high minimum down payment requirements will only exclude hundreds of thousands of buyers from home ownership, despite their creditworthiness and proven ability to afford the monthly payment, because of the dramatic increase in the wealth required to purchase a home,” said Phipps.

The definition of QRM is important because it will determine the types of mortgages that will generally be available to borrowers in the future. Borrowers with less than 20 percent down could be forced to pay higher fees and interest rates, up to 3 percentage points more, for safe loans that otherwise do not meet too narrow QRM criteria.

NAR is concerned that a narrowly defined QRM will also require severe tightening of FHA eligibility requirements and higher FHA premiums to prevent huge increases in its already robust share of the market, adding additional roadblocks to sustainable home ownership.

“Saving the necessary down payment has always been the principal obstacle to buyers seeking to purchase their first home. Proposals requiring high down payments will only drive more borrowers to FHA, increase costs for borrowers by raising interest rates and fees, and effectively price many eligible borrowers out of the housing market,” said Phipps. “We strongly urge the regulators to consider the negative consequences of setting onerous limits on the availability of credit.”

The National Association of Realtors®, “The Voice for Real Estate,” is America’s largest trade association, representing 1.1 million members involved in all aspects of the residential and commercial real estate industries.

It’s entirely probable you’ve heard about the new NAR Realtor® Party Political Survival Initiative introduced at the AE Institute this past Sunday. While NAR has not made a broad announcement of the program yet, our AE’s are returning from their meetings this week with information on the initiative and word has been getting out from Inman, from the blogs, and of course on Realtor.org itself.

According to NAR, the initiative was launched partially in response to last years Supreme Court decision, the celebrated Citizens United Case. As forecast, that decision stands as a game changer in the lobbying world granting corporations the same rights as individuals to contribute to political campaigns. The price of doing business has just gone up and if you want to stay at the table with the serious players, you’d better step up your game.

That’s what NAR is proposing by instituting a mandatory $40 dues increase effective 2012. The issue will be voted on at NAR’s Mid-Year Legislative meetings in May.

The following is a post by NAR stating their reasons for launching the initiative. I would encourage you to read it. I have also included the slide show presented to our AE’s in Dallas this past Sunday. I have no doubt this will be hotly debated as we approach our May meetings and I encourage you to make you opinions knows to me, to your local associations as well as your state and NAR Directors. Make sure to note that 2/3 of the funds raised will be channeled back to your state and local associations for local purposes.

Why did NAR create the REALTOR® Party Political Survival Initiative?
•  In January of 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission.
•  The ruling states that corporate dollars—so-called soft dollars—can be used to fund independent expenditure campaigns.
•  This not only changes the way elections are financed at the national level, but it also overturns restrictions that allowed only hard dollars—those funds contributed for political purposes by individuals, rather than corporations—to be used in 23 states.
•  This means political fundraising as we have known it for the past 100 years just shifted dramatically.
•  Corporate funds/dues can now be used to shape opinions about candidates in ALL 50 states.
•  It is a game changer of gigantic proportions.
•  It is as if the goal posts on a 100 yard football field were expanded to now cover 140 yards.
•  In order for “The Voice for Real Estate” to have the impact it has had for the past 100 years in terms of political advocacy, the REALTOR® organization is stepping up its game.
•  No one has spoken with more power or as passionately about protecting private property rights and fighting for opening the door to the American Dream of Home Ownership than the REALTOR® Family.
•  To maintain and grow our political power in this new landscape, NAR launched the REALTOR® Party Political Survival Initiative.
•  The REALTOR® Party Political Survival Initiative did not just happen overnight.
•  It was the result of nearly a year of careful study and consideration.

What does the REALTOR® Party Political Survival Initiative mean for members?
•  The proposal is for a dedicated dues increase of $40.00.
•  The increase would take effect in the 2012 budget year.
•  Because it is “dedicated” to this initiative, it would be used exclusively to fund political advocacy efforts.
•  In the past, NAR has already contributed funds to this initiative out of its operating budget.
•  But to undertake the initiative at this level and give it a best chance for success, greater additional funding is needed.
•  The increased dollars will be dedicated solely to advocacy purposes as outlined by the Political Survival Initiative.
•  If this dues increase is approved, over 50% of NAR budget would be devoted to political advocacy, which consistently ranks among members as the #1 benefit they receive from NAR.

What are the benefits of the Political Survival Initiative?
•  The most powerful benefit is it will keep the REALTOR® organization as one of the most influential advocacy groups in America.
•  There are monumental issues coming down the pike that will affect members in their daily businesses, such as the future of mortgage finance and keeping housing affordable in America.
•  We must have the power to shape this pivotal moment for the American Dream of Home Ownership.
•  Most importantly, these dollars will be available to state associations and local boards.
•  2/3rds of the dollars raised will be returned back to states to be used in support of local candidates and issue campaigns, and for other political advocacy needs—to help shape the opinions of candidates on real estate-related issues as they work their way up as elected leaders.
•  It will combine NAR funds with state/local funds to increase our political power
•  It will create early relationships with state and local lawmakers/policymakers
•  It will shape the political make-up of state or local governing bodies.
•  NAR President Ron Phipps often comments that “now is our time.”
•  With this initiative, REALTORS® are seizing the moment for home ownership.
•  We are doing this NOT ONLY because of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision, but because our core competency is our grass roots advocacy; it’s where we need to be investing today so our future advocacy efforts will be successful tomorrow.
•  We need to be grooming our “REALTOR® Champions” at the state / local levels now, before some of them progress to become elected leaders at the federal level.
•  The political press in Washington has already noted the emerging clout of the REALTOR® Party.
•  A recent article in Politico said: “REALTORS®… are going to want to be politically effective, and a large measure of their influence is that they are present everywhere.”
•  Now is our time to seize the day.

“Government is like a baby,” Ronald Reagan was fond of saying. “An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.”  If the former California governor were observing Sacramento today, he would probably add that our state government functions more like “triplets,” and has been doing so for more than ten years.

Back at the beginning of the millennium, the California treasury was overflowing due to capital gains tax receipts from what has become known as the “dot.com bubble.”  Almost everyone in the state understood that these tax producing profits were the result of a short-term business cycle, and the excessive flow of tax revenue would not be a permanent condition.  Unfortunately, there were a small group of Californians who did not understand these basic economic principles, including the majority in the state Legislature and Governor Gray Davis.

These officials responded to the increased revenue by spending it all and committing Californians to pay for expensive long-term programs, like radically increased pensions for government workers, that now have state and local governments facing nearly a half-trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities.

This profligate approach to governing was a contributing factor to the successful recall of Davis.  However, governor Schwarzenegger, and the party-hearty lawmakers that continued to dominate the Legislature carried on like there was never a problem.  When the state came up short, they used accounting gimmicks that allowed them to carry on spending as if there were no tomorrow.

Between 2003 and 2007, spending increased by one-third.  Then the housing bubble burst, and these same suspects imposed the largest tax increase in the history of all 50 states.  They had learned their lesson, they said, and pledged to taxpayers they would use the two years of massively higher taxes to buy time to reorganize and reform their spending ways.  Two years later, and in spite of California families having paid about two-thousand dollars in extra taxes, the state is now facing a $26 billion shortfall.  The “spendaholics” have fallen off the wagon, again.

All of this could have been avoided if the malefactors, who clearly lack self-control, had been compelled to work under a hard spending cap.

Because the politicians that control the Legislature and our current governor – the Department of Finance shows that Governor Brown’s budget will grow 31% by 2015 – are still in a state of denial regarding spending, there is an urgent need to take measures to restore a strict spending limit on state government.

This is why Senator Tony Strickland has introduced Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 10, sponsored by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, that would impose a firm spending cap on lawmakers.  The expenditure limit includes General Fund and special funds, and contains no exemptions for education or local government funding.  It creates a reserve of up to 10% of spending; this reserve can only be tapped to backfill revenue shortfalls in the current budget year and to fund non-fiscally related emergencies.  Funds could only be used by a Declaration of the Governor and two-thirds vote of the Legislature.  Half of the excess revenues beyond the 10% cap would be used to pay off existing debt.

Back when Bill Clinton was running for president, a big sign that read, “It’s the economy, stupid” was placed on his campaign office wall.  In an ideal world every member of the Legislature would be required to post a sign on their office wall that said, “It’s the spending, stupid.”  Sen. Strickland’s SCA 10 is the taxpayers’ way of sending this message.

Now is the time for REALTORS® to act!  On March 28, an all member Call for Action (CFA) will be launched.  This CFA will ask REALTORS® to contact their House Members to urge them not to touch the MID in any legislative or budget proposal.  It will also urge them to sign on to H.Res. 25 expressing
the sense of Congress that the current Federal income tax deduction on interest paid on debt secured by a first or second home should not be further restricted.

First, be on the lookout early next week for the CFA (either from your broker or from NAR).  Second, respond immediately to the CFA.  Third, spread the word and ask your colleagues to respond too.  Any House budget action will be quick.  MID is on the line.  Now is not the time to sit back and let
someone else make the decisions.

C.A.R. has not taken a position in support of tax extensions, but is only in support of putting the tax extensions on the June ballot to let California voters decide.

For more information, contact Christopher Carlisle, C.A.R.’s legislative advocate at (916) 492-5200.

I don’t know if I agree with today’s move by CAR – but they didn’t ask me. However, it appears to be in line with recent polls showing the majority of Californians appear to prefer having a voice in this latest budget skirmish. 61% believe the issue of  Gov. Browns tax & cut budget should be decided by a vote of the people. Even 56% of Republicans believe this should be the case although 61% of Republicans also say they would vote
against the tax measure. A majority of voters also indicate they would not vote for any new or increased taxes – but the survey didn’t drill right down to whether the majority would vote to extend the currently increased taxes for another 5 years.

While I am not in favor of the tax increase that was foisted on us two years ago and is now scheduled to expire, if the few Republicans who have not backed themselves into a corner with the No New Tax pledge can negotiate some meaningful cuts – not just the lame-ass cuts proposed by the Governor, it’s worth bringing to a vote of the people. Without the current taxes being extended, there will be foul nastiness ahead for our state. The few real cuts that have been proposed as well as any future cuts, would be to programs that probably should not be cut. The retirement boondoggle, entitlements and growing employment at the state level will not be impacted. Education, police and parks will be.

Whats worse, if the current tax structure is not extended for another 5 years, in addition to the worthless and superficial cuts that may occur, we would likely face a slew of new taxes disguised as fees, levies and outright thievery from our cities and counties. Many of those taxes would also be aimed at independent contractors, small business owners and other housing related areas. I mean, face it folks, our state is broke and should be declared bankrupt if such a thing were allowed and if we had any politicians with enough balls to do it. Unfortunately it’s not and we don’t.

Further, if the tax extension is placed on a special ballot I believe it would pass. It would be supported by massive spending by the  public employee unions, teachers, nurses, etc, as well as the vast entitlement population who live on the public dole. California has reached a tipping point where we have more takers than  givers, people who rely on the system for their income whether it’s direct payroll, retirement or welfare. When that dynamic exists in a state without the political will to address it, the result will inevitably result in those voters making sure their nest continues to be lined as long as the rest of us can pay for it.

Of even greater concern, and something I believe is another inevitability, taxes will get placed on the ballot with the promise of real and substantial cuts to programs and entitlements. The taxes will get passed but the cuts will not occur. We already saw what happened a few years ago when Arnold worked up the machismo to try to tackle a few state employment issues. He was sued under the table  and no jobs were lost. Even the few cost reductions that might have been realized by the imposition of a few months of furlough days was largely negated by the lawsuits necessary to defend the governors right to impose them.

So we’ll get our existing higher taxes extended another five years, the $12 Billion in cuts will not materialize, there will be a call for more ‘fees’ on services and any other way to wring the last few bucks out of the business class and the paying populace and next year we’ll be right back here trying to figure out why we’re another $25 Billion in the crapper.

Ahhh California.

On the upside, it is almost 80 today and the sun is shining beautifully. Had a great lunch with my Congressional Rep on an outdoor patio and it’s almost time to pour a cold one. What? Me worry?

To say this hadn’t worked would be an understatement. Clients who actually followed his advice were summarily re-evicted if they were lucky and arrested if they were not. After all, the homes were now the property of the bank and in some cases had already been resold so charges of breaking and entering and other minor misdeeds were alleged.

Turns out Mr. Pines himself was in foreclosure on some homes he owned and lost his own law office building to foreclosure (he didn’t try to break into his own building). At that time a judge had also slapped him with a $16,000 fine for filing frivolous lawsuits and for wasting his time and not acting in the best interest of his clients.  He also had a couple restraining orders against him for civil harassment after a trial and had been cited for contempt at least once.

Today attorneys for the State Bar of California asked a judge to suspend the law license of Mr. Pines. According to the state bar, Pines behavior had become ‘so
egregious’ that it filed to have his license suspended on an interim basis while it seeks a permanent removal. Jeez, that’s like watching sharks attack another shark – gruesome yet exciting, and as rare in legal circles as it is in nature.

Chief Trial Counsel James Towery was quoted in a written statement as saying “To remove a lawyer from active practice before formal charges are filed is a drastic remedy. In this case, that remedy is justified by the established misconduct of Michael T. Pines, who has shown complete disrespect for the law, the courts and especially the best interest of his clients.” Duh.

Never to be outdone, Pines has filed his own lawsuit against the state bar. “I’m sure the charges are going to be thrown out,” says Pines. “They’re going to be really embarrassed when they find out the truth.”

Hmm, attorneys vs. attorney. I’m guessing the truth might be a rare commodity in this v enue. Of course that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Meanwhile people who have already suffered through a legal foreclosure in Southern California will not have the opportunity to be further victimized by this predator – at least until he teaches the state bar a lesson and gets his dorsal fin back.

An article appeared in today’s Californian that adds the housing element to the mix. Redevlopment has provided over 91,000 affordable housing units since 1995. For every 100 units created, 125 local jobs are created and 32 permanent jobs. Some in Sacramento just don’t get it – they are actively trying to kill what’s left of the housing industry not understanding that housing speeds an economic recovery, housing is a jobs engine which our state desperately needs.

Click here to view the forum post: Wrong places to cut.

Also note the prominent warning about the so-called ‘Riverside County Tax Authority’ mailer soliciting $167 to produce a copy of your grant deed. Larry will be happy to get you one for about $10 or $20 bucks. Don’t get conned. Check with the authority first.

The U.S. Treasury Department has approved CalHFA’s plan to use nearly $2 billion in federal funding to help California families struggling to pay their mortgages.

The Keep Your Home California programs are focused on assisting low and moderate income families stay in their homes, when possible, and leveraging additional contributions from mortgage servicers.

Primary objectives for the Keep Your Home California programs include:

• Preserving homeownership for low and moderate income homeowners in California by reducing the number of delinquencies and preventing avoidable foreclosures
• Assisting in the stabilization of California communities

Each of the Keep Your Home California programs is designed to address one or more aspects of the current housing crisis by doing the following:

• Helping low and moderate income homeowners retain their homes if they either have suffered a financial hardship such as unemployment, have experienced a change in household circumstance such as death, illness or disability, or are subject to a recent or upcoming increase in their monthly mortgage payment and are at risk of default because of this economic hardship when coupled with a severe decline in their home’s value.
• Creating a simple, effective way to get federal funds to assist low and moderate income homeowners who meet one or all of the objective criteria described above. Speed of delivery will be balanced with fulfillment of the specific program’s mission and purpose.
• Creating programs that have an immediate, direct economic and social impact on low and moderate income homeowners and their neighborhoods.

The Public Review Draft General Plan 2035 and Environmental Impact Report, along with the Technical Appendices, are now available to download from the project website (www.murrietaplan.info), by following this link http://www.murrietaplan.info/documents.asp  or to pick up on CD at the City of Murrieta, Community Development Department.

Copies of the Public Review Draft General Plan 2035, Public Review Draft General Plan 2035 Environmental Impact Report, and Technical Appendices are available for review at:

City of Murrieta
Community Development Department
1 Town Square
Murrieta, California  92562

and

Murrieta Public Library
8 Town Square
Murrieta, California 92562

Public Review and Comment Period

The Public Review Draft General Plan 2035 and Public Review Draft General Plan 2035 Environmental Impact Report have a 45-day public comment period that begins on February 8, 2011 and ends on March 24, 2011.
Written comments on the Public Review Draft General Plan 2035 and/or Public Review Draft General Plan 2035 Environmental Impact Report must be submitted no later than 5:00 PM on March 24, 2011 to:

Mr. Greg Smith, Associate Planner
City of Murrieta
1 Town Square
24601 Jefferson Avenue
Murrieta, California  92562

UPCOMING HEARINGS ON THE PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

Specific dates have not yet been determined; however, public hearings are anticipated to be scheduled over the next few months with both the Planning Commission and City Council.  Stay tuned for more information on the website (www.murrietaplan.info) about the hearings.

Planning Commission – Public hearings anticipated in March 2011
City Council – Public hearings anticipated in April 2011

If you work with condominium buyers, you’ll want to know if the condominiums in your area are approved and eligible for an FHA loan.  C.A.R.’s subsidiary, REBS®, has introduced Clarus FHA Approval™ Eligibility Check, which offers a unique searchable database that will allow you to quickly determine FHA loan eligibility via a simple property address search.  Using this service, you and your FHA clients can avoid failed transactions and non-recoverable costs due to undetermined FHA loan eligibility status.  C.A.R. has negotiated special discounts for its members.

You’ll also want to let the condominium associations in your area know that HUD now requires that an entire condominium development be preapproved before an FHA loan may be granted.  FHA loans currently represent almost half of all new mortgages nationwide, and failure for a development to be preapproved to be eligible for FHA loans will almost certainly impact the marketability and value of the development.  Clarus FHA Approval™ also offers Approval Services to assist condominiums in seeking HUD approval.  Discounts are available to condominium associations referred by a C.A.R. member.  For more information about both Clarus FHA Approval™ services.

AB 32, the state’s landmark 2006 climate change statute, required CARB to develop a regulatory program to reduce state-wide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.  In response to this mandate, the Board of CARB already approved a first set of comprehensive regulations in December 2010; the regulations were based on an earlier “Scoping Plan” developed by the CARB staff.   The Tentative Decision partially grants a petition for a writ of mandate brought by a coalition of environmental justice organizations (Petitioners) that alleged that CARB’s Scoping Plan violated both AB 32 and CEQA. “Environmental Justice” is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.

Although the Superior Court denied all claims related to AB 32, the court found that CARB: 1) failed to adequately discuss and analyze the impacts of alternatives in its proposed Scoping Plan as required by its CEQA implementing regulations; and 2) improperly approved the Scoping Plan prior to completing the environmental review required by CEQA.  In upholding the Petitioners’ challenge on these two CEQA issues, the Superior Court issued a Peremptory Writ of Mandate and enjoined CARB from further implementation of the Scoping Plan until it complies with all CEQA requirements. Parties to the case have 15 days from the issuance of the Tentative Decision to file objections before the Superior Court issues a final decision in the case.

While this is good news for some, the order to stop the implementation of AB 32 has little effect on the housing sector and will not affect other Green House Gas reducing mandates already in place such as SB 375: the anti-sprawl law which requires regional governments to reduce Green House Gas emissions via land use and transportation planning, and AB 758: which will require energy efficient retrofits in California’s existing homes and commercial properties. The stay will, however, affect the development of regulations concerning Cap-and-Trade, Low Carbon Fuel Standards, Renewable Energy, Landfills, Vehicles, Industrial Emissions, etc.

C.A.R. took a neutral position on AB 32 when it passed through the legislature in 2006.  At the time, C.A.R. did not find tailpipe emissions reductions and cap-and-trade policies to be of direct and immediate concern to REALTORS®.  Subsequent to the passage of AB 32, C.A.R. has monitored AB 32 implementation planning and policy development meetings. C.A.R. remains neutral on the goal of GHG reduction yet continues to urge CARB and other state agencies to consider the real cost of doing business and to take a realistic approach to the implementation of their rules and policies.

From NAR President-elect Moe Veissi –

Six of the past eight recessions have ended due to increasing strength in the housing market. The other two were due to wars. That seems like an easy choice. We need to get behind housing. This battle against housing is counterproductive and the attack on the mortgage interest deduction is an attack on one of the basic foundations of the American Dream.

Similarly we should seek to preserve the basics of the GSE’s.They can certainly be improved upon but their services are vital to home buyers. They provide a foundation and critical financial instruments that allow many people to buy homes that otherwise would not be able to. Keep in mind that during the height of the meltdown, Fannie and Freddie had take-back rates of about 3 1/2% while at the same time banks like B of A and Wells were taking back 15% to 18%.

You hear people today who don’t know the history, who don’t know any better – oh, Canada doesn’t have a 30 year fixed mortgage and their housing market is great. Oh, Europe doesn’t have a Fannie/Freddie and their market is great. The fact is, their markets don’t compare with ours. Never have. Nobody does it like us. These other countries are trying to figure out how to do it like we do and we’re trying to figure out how to kill our system and adopt the systems others are trying to get rid of. So why would we try to emulate markets with which we have nothing in common? Why would we destroy 100 years of success to become more like an inferior market? It just doesn’t make sense.

These are not short term problems we are dealing with and they will keep rearing their heads. We have saddled ourselves with tremendous debt so attacks on basic and short term sources of tax revenue will be ongoing. Don’t believe them when they tell you – oh, we aren’t going to take it all away. Just this little bit. Yeah, just that little bit this time. Then  a little more, then a little more, you know how that works.

Realtors just don’t realize the power we have in our communities and our country. But we’ve got to stand up and be counted if we want to be heard. We need to present Congress with 1/2 million Realtor calls on issues instead of 100,000. When we can consistently deliver 1/2 million member voices or more to our Congressional leaders, they will know we mean business.

Long-time readers will be familiar with the Stonewood case, wherein these perpetrators enticed hundreds of people to invest in real estate. But not just invest – they were talked into buying homes for $100,000 or more over asking price with that overage going to the third party – Stonewood. People who could barely qualify for a car loan were talked into buying multiple properties, most i the $500,000 and over range, with the promise that the deficit between rental payments and the mortgage payment would come out of an investment fund seeded by that ‘overage amount’.

In some cases deficit payments were made for a month or so but quickly vanished as the perpetrators lived large, driving fancy cars, boats and living in multi-million dollar homes themselves. Ultimately over 200 homes went onto foreclosure, many starting in 2006 – well before the foreclosure crisis started. This wave of dead lawns jump-started our local foreclosure fiasco as the 200 homes were dumped onto the market along with dozens more from people who had bought in neighborhoods where the fraudulent purchases has driven up the comps.

Our local real estate association started noticing these transactions in late 2004 and by mid-2005 had compiled an extensive dossier on the scheme. At that time it involved about 60 homes and maybe $30 – $40 million dollars. We tried in vain to get local law enforcement, our District Attorney, our Dept. of Real Estate, the FBI – ANYBODY – to take an interest. To no avail.

Finally in late 2007 the SEC got involved not from the real estate side but from the investment fraud angle. This prompted the DRE to yank the brokers license from the principles but by then the damage had largely been done. Finally in 2008, the Justice Department, FBI and our DA got involved and brought the scanm to a screeching halt. Of course by then it had ballooned from 60 homes and $30 million to over 200 homes and $140+ million. Our DA was all puffed up taking credit for this great bust when, for years we had not even been able to get a meeting with him to discuss it. He was the first incumbent DA in our county to be voted out of office in over a century when voters rejected him this past November.

Two local reporters, Leslie Berkman of the Press Enterprise, and Chris Bagley or the Californian, were instrumental in keeping this in the public eye. Dozens of the victims banded together in a class action lawsuit. That helped. Our own Real estate Fraud Task Force was born out of this scandal and remains active and vigilant to this day.

So while many of the victims say a 18 year prison sentence is not nearly long enough for the ringleader, it’s at least a start. No punishment can ever rebuild the damage done to our community and no jury award will ever compensate for the retirement savings lost and the lives ruined by these people.

Maybe the lesson to be learned is – if the deal sounds too good to be true…

Of course as we all know, there’s a sucker born every minute and two grifters to fleece him out of his cash.

For the full story, please click below:

Murrieta Men Agree to Prison Time
Victims of Duncan’s Scheme Speak Out