Fair housing for all

fair housing
Fair Housing (infographic from chicagorealtor.com)

Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, better known as the Fair Housing Act turns 50 this year.  Title VIII was the culmination of a number of laws that focused on personal rights.  Personal property rights are protected in Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.  The Civil Rights Act of 1866 was enacted to specify that all citizens, regardless of race or color, were equally protected under the law, which includes property rights.  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.  The Fair Housing Act expanded the protected classes by prohibiting discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of dwellings based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability and familial status (the presence of children).

Some states and localities further expand the protected classes specified in the Fair Housing Act.  For example, Maryland protects fair housing regardless of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.  Montgomery County protects fair housing regardless of race, sex, marital status, physical or mental disability, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, presence of children, source of income, sexual orientation, age and family responsibilities.

Some say we have come a long way in protecting fair housing rights.  But have we?  Even though we have come a long way to protect the rights for a number of groups, some still find it acceptable to discriminate against those who are not listed as a protected class.

It was reported last week that a home seller in Sacramento CA put her home for sale with the caveat to not sell to a Donald Trump supporter.  Some legal experts say the home seller may run into a legal challenge based on the First Amendment.  There are only a few states that include political affiliation, activity, or opinion as a protected class against discrimination.  California’s Bane Civil Rights Act includes political affiliation as a protected class against violence or the threat of violence.

Drew Bollea of CBS 13 of Sacramento (sacramento.cbslocal.com) reported that the home seller stated that she did not want to sell to a Trump supporter.  And when it was pointed out that it could possibly narrow the buyer pool by 39 percent (39 percent of Sacramento voted for the President), she said that she did not care because her point was more important than money.  She stated, “When you’re talking about principles, ethics and morals, it runs very, very deep.”

Principles, ethics and morals Indeed.  Going back to the intentions of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the spirit of the Fair Housing Act is inclusion.  In today’s politically divisive atmosphere, there are many who would agree with the Sacramento home seller’s rationale of her discriminatory demand.  However, her excuse proclaiming “principle, ethics and morality” harken back to the rationale of discriminatory practices of the past.

April is National Fair Housing Month.  It’s ironic that while President Trump proclaimed this year’s Fair Housing Month recognizing the 50th anniversary of the enactment of the Fair Housing Act, those who voted for him are singled out.  It appears there is still much work ahead for fair housing advocates.  In his proclamation, President Trump urged “all Americans to learn more about their rights and responsibilities under the Fair Housing Act and reaffirm their commitment to making homeownership within reach, no matter one’s background.”

By Dan Krell
Copyright © 2018

If you like this post, do not copy; instead please:
link to the article,
like it on facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector

Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

Presidential election and home sales

Elections have vastly changed in mood and intensity.  It used to be that the candidates debated about substantive issues looking for win-win solutions, including housing.  Maybe some of you remember how both the Clinton and Dole campaigns showcased their ideas of expanding the capital gains exemption during the 1996 election.  Housing and home sales doesn’t seem to be a platform issue anymore.  Elections have become divisive and nasty, even among the electorate; and for many Americans, the trending (real estate) election issue is – whom is moving to Canada!

That’s right, moving to Canada.  Maybe you’ve heard someone at work or at the store proclaim they are moving to Canada if “the other candidate” wins the election.  The theme of moving to Canada after the election has become a mantra so much so that it’s become part of pop culture. The idea has even been satirized by the likes of South Park.  And of course there is the growing number of celebrities who vow to move to Canada if the election outcome isn’t to their liking.

Of course the threat of moving to Canada is tongue in cheek (for most), or is it?  Nevertheless, leave it to astute real estate agents who realized that people considering such a move is now a target market.  Agent ads and blog posts popped up in recent weeks reaching out to those disaffected home owners asking for their business.  Reporting for Buzfeed, Craig Silverman reported on two agents who posted such an ad on their Facebook pages (Leaving Because Of Trump? These Texas Realtors Want To Sell Your House; buzfeed.com; May13, 2016).  Although both agents received a lot of attention for their seemingly whimsical posts, there was a mixed response; some did not get the humor.  It was reported that one of the two agents interviewed was asked to remove her post; and of course neither reported any new business from the posts.

Every four years, people wonder if presidential elections effect the real estate market.  During the 2012 election cycle, the real estate portal Movoto took it upon itself to find an answer (David Cross; Election Years Are Bad for Home Prices; movoto.com; May 12, 2012).  They analyzed historical data from the California Association of Realtors® and found that there is indeed a direct effect of a presidential election on home prices (at least in California).  They determined that the average home sale price during an election year is lower than that of the years preceding and following an election.

Movoto’s hypothesis was: “Presidential election years are stressful for the American people and in times of uncertainty people are less likely to take chances—this includes making large purchases such as a new house.”  While the National Association of Realtors® comment on Movoto’s findings was, “We’ve observed no correlation between levels of home sales and an election year. The market responds to a wide range of economic factors, including jobs, interest rates and consumer confidence.”

Although there maybe anecdotal evidence that presidential election years affect home prices; there is no doubt that the outcome of a presidential election effects policy, which as a result affects the economy and the housing market (see Experts: Housing to Grow Steadily, But Maybe Less So if Trump, Cruz or Sanders is Elected President; Zillow.com; May 17, 2016).  But no one has yet suggested that US elections would have an effect on Canada’s real estate market.

By Dan Krell
Copyright © 2016

If you like this post, do not copy; instead please:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector


Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

Housing and presidential election

from trulia.com

Another presidential election, and there will most likely be very little discussion and debate about housing policy. During the 2012 presidential election, housing seemed to take a back seat as the real estate market was still emerging from a foreclosure crisis and recession just four years earlier. Fast forward to today and homeownership is hovering near a 30-year low.  Homeownership is out of reach to many due to tightened mortgage qualifying and increasing home prices; while Americans’ incomes are being squeezed by rising rents.

Enter Ron Terwilliger. A successful real estate developer and philanthropist, Terwilliger launched the J. Ronald Terwilliger Foundation for Housing America’s Families in 2014. The organization’s mission is to “…recalibrate federal housing policy to more effectively address our nation’s critical affordable housing challenges and to meet the housing needs of future generations.”

Giving the keynote address at The Affordable Housing Developers Summit in Chicago, Terwilliger described an evolving “silent housing crisis.” He proclaimed that “A legacy of the great recession, the rental affordability crisis is often overlooked by policymakers, ignored by the media, and underestimated, at best, by the general public.” And although affordable housing is a bi-partisan issue, he stated that candidates don’t talk about the issue (housingfinance.com).

New Homes

So it should come as no surprise that the J. Ronald Terwilliger Foundation for Housing America’s Families and the Bipartisan Policy Center hosted a housing summit this past October. Speaking at the summit were a number of presidential candidates, policy makers, current and former Senators, a former HUD Secretary, local officials, and industry leaders and experts. Unfortunately, the presidential candidates that are still in the race, did not participate. The summit was held in New Hampshire, where housing costs for 36% of residents is more than 30% of their gross income; and median rents have increased 50% since 2000 (housingwire.com).

The housing summit seemed to inspire realtor.com chief economist Jonathan Smoke, who shortly afterward penned a statement declaring his candidacy for president as leader of the “Housing Party” (As President, I’ll Make American Housing Great Again—Really; realtor.com; October 21, 2015). Smoke believes that housing should be first on the national agenda stating, “The market won’t solve all of our housing problems on its own. And our government seems incapable of working together to find solutions that can help…” Laying out a detailed platform, Smoke proclaims that a vote for him would “…build our way to a stronger economy and more affordable housing for the middle class—a better America for all of us.” He said that he would work toward getting a home for every family.

But it may be that housing policy is a bit more complicated than just proclaiming “homes for everyone.” In a frank analysis of housing policy, Daniel Hertz laid out what seems to be diametrically opposed positions: policy should keep housing affordable so as not to price people out of the market; and policy should protect house values, because homes are an investment and wealth building vehicle (American Housing Policy’s Two Basic Ideas Pull Cities in Opposite Directions; theatlantic.com; October 14, 2015).

Hertz believes that these seemingly opposite policy positions can be “reconciled” by offering a wide variety of housing types for a broad range of incomes. Additionally, he discussed how local privately developed affordable housing programs (such as Montgomery County’s Workforce Housing and MPDU programs) is one avenue to a comprehensive housing policy.

By Dan Krell
Copyright © 2016

If you like this post, do not copy; instead please:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector


Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

Housing takes a backseat in election year politics

by Dan Krell ©2012
DanKrell.com

votingIt’s an election year and the spin is increasing. As the Republican primaries are focusing on economics and jobs, there has not been an honest discussion about the current state of the housing market and how to revive it. As the election cycle heats up, expect to hear increased rhetoric and spin about housing from pundits and candidates.

One hotly debated issue is government involvement in the housing market. The roles of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and FHA in the housing bubble and recovery will undoubtedly become part of the election debate. However, the talks of winding down Fannie and Freddie’s operations continue, while secondary markets continue to rely on the mortgage giants for growth and stability.

Another issue that is certainly a hot potato is the mortgage interest deduction (MID). Argued by some as a government subsidy, the elimination or limitation of the MID has been recommended by the likes of the Congressional Budget Office and the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (also known as the President’s Deficit Reduction Commission) to reduce government budget deficits.

The fight to save the MID has become a local issue as Governor Martin O’Malley’s recent budget proposes to limit the deduction. Commenting on the Maryland MID limitation, Mary C. Antoun, Chief Executive Officer of the Maryland Association of Realtors® stated in a recent press release that, “Maryland is one of the most real estate tax dependent states in the country”… “The state has one of the most aggressive real estate tax structures in the country, ranking 11th among all states in terms of total real estate tax burden. And taxes on real estate are the primary source of revenue for Maryland’s local jurisdictions.” She added, “If tax deductions are capped, as proposed by the Governor’s budget, many Maryland homeowners will lose some of the value of their mortgage interest deduction and the deductibility of state and local property taxes…”

votingAs the benefits of homeownership are questioned, the MID has remained a major home buyer incentive; as demonstrated by a survey commissioned by the National Association of Realtors®. The 2010 Harris Interactive survey indicated that of the nearly 3,000 homeowners and renters who responded, about three-fourths of homeowners and two-thirds of renters said the mortgage interest deduction was extremely or very important to them.

Will the recent positive and optimistic housing figures recently released by the National Association of Realtors® (Realtor.org) and increased new home builder activity put the housing market in the back seat to other issues? Maybe, but positive housing news has been reported throughout the financial crisis and recession. Increased home sales were reported in the summer of 2008, which combined with optimistic housing and financial reports from many sources gave hope to a housing recovery. Likewise, positive housing reports in the fall of 2009 indicated increased activity with expiring home buyer credits. Optimism for housing in 2010 and 2011 was also reported because of activity spikes.

Traditionally, housing has been a major component of an economic recovery. This recession has been different such that housing has remained a drag on the economy. And even though our region has boasted impressive housing numbers compared to the rest of the country, issues remain (such as sliding home values, underwater mortgages, vacant homes, etc).

Yup, it’s an election year. Will we hear a viable solution to improving the housing market?

More news and articles on “the Blog”
This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. This article was originally published in the Montgomery County Sentinel the week of February 27, 2012. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws. Copyright © 2012 Dan Krell.