Home Sales:

Housing aid Bush stopped may return

U.S. House bill would allow down-payment assistance programs

Sam Morris

Susan Nagata and her husband were able to buy their home with down payment assistance provided through the Nehemiah program.

By Brian Eckhouse (contact)

Monday, Feb. 16, 2009 | 2 a.m.

Builder has idea about how U.S. can help

Real Estate in Crisis

Feds offer assistance on mortgages – if lenders cooperate (10-1-2008)
The down payment for your new home: $0 (9-3-2008)

The Nehemiah Program

Boosters of down-payment assistance programs that had benefited poorer homebuyers before they were abolished by the Bush administration are lobbying for their revival, saying they could help rejuvenate the distressed housing market.

Since 1997, the programs have produced more than $2.36 billion in home sales in Clark County to buyers whose incomes averaged less than $60,000, according to a spokesman for one of the programs, and gained importance when the subprime market began collapsing.

Under the programs, the buyer’s cash burden is eased because the seller contributes from 3 percent to 6 percent of the purchase price toward the buyer’s down payment and/or closing costs, and the nonprofit organization donates up to 3 percent.

But the Bush administration reasoned that if homeowners didn’t use their own money for down payments, they were less financially committed to their homes and thus more likely to default.

The Housing and Urban Development Department lobbied Congress last spring to stop insuring loans where the programs were used, and Congress did so in July. The ban took effect Oct. 1.

Texas Democrat Al Green is pushing a House bill that would reinstate Nehemiah — a program popular in the Las Vegas Valley — and other programs like it, but with more restrictive credit conditions.

Representatives of the Nehemiah Corp. of America, based in Sacramento, say the bill would help stabilize declining home values and reduce the number of foreclosed homes glutting the market by empowering prospective homebuyers who are now on the sidelines to enter the market.

Scott Syphax, Nehemiah’s president and chief executive, estimates that an additional 40,000 to 50,000 homes would sell monthly nationwide if the program is reestablished.

Opening the market to them might prompt new-home construction, leading ultimately to 230,000 jobs, many in construction, Syphax says.

Area real estate agents who specialized in such down-payment assistance programs say their reinstatement would also stanch their falling incomes. With Nehemiah’s departure, agent Teresa McCormick says, her income has dropped by two-thirds. Carla Ross, another valley agent, estimates her income is down 30 percent.

Nehemiah’s critics point to data indicating higher delinquency rates under down-payment assistance programs compared with other Federal Housing Administration-sponsored loans. About 7.5 percent of down-payment assistance loans defaulted in 2007, the Los Angeles Times reported, compared with 2.9 percent of FHA loans that required homeowners to contribute at least 3 percent of the purchase price as a down payment.

But at least one economist questions the percent difference of FHA’s findings, pegging the actual default rate for borrowers in down payment assistance programs at closer to 5 percent. And Syphax notes that a default is not equivalent to a foreclosure and is often cured.

“If the measure of success is someone who has a perfect record, God help us what the true homeownership rate would be in the country today,” he says. “What we really need to focus on, is how to create support systems to create sustainable homeownership.”

The Obama administration has yet to tap an FHA commissioner, a HUD spokesman says, so it’s unknown whether it supports Green’s bill.

Among the concerns about the program is that a seller could increase the price of his house to recoup his contribution to the buyer’s down payment. Conservative economist Alex Brill estimates that if a seller increases the price of the house by, say, $2,500 to cover his contribution, it may add about $15 a month to the mortgage payment.

And McCormick disputes the notion that down payment dictates the odds of default.

“I put a lot of money down on my house, but I can’t pay my mortgage right now,” she says, noting that she’s two months behind. “If I can’t pay the bills right now, I can’t pay the bills. It doesn’t matter how much you put down.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid thinks that even if home prices were artificially increased by homebuilders or sellers to recoup their costs of participating in Nehemiah, it didn’t contribute to the housing crisis, his spokesman Jon Summers says.

Nehemiah has stipulated that applicants have steady jobs. “And (applicants) need to show they can make a payment,” says mortgage specialist Shani Fazzi of South Wind Financial, a Las Vegas mortgage company, who supports the return of Nehemiah. “We’re not giving away free money. This is not like during subprime.”

New homeowner Susan Nagata concedes the seller of the four-bedroom house she bought through Nehemiah last year probably tacked the closing costs onto the asking price, but doesn’t regret the transaction. At about $1,000, her monthly mortgage is $300 less a month than what she and her husband had paid for an apartment.

“I had figured I’d never own a home again,” the 58-year-old says, noting their $1,500 savings at the time they bought the home.

Had the Nagatas looked for a house today, Nagata is convinced she and her husband would still be renting. Their income is fairly fixed, so there was little chance they could save enough for a down payment. The Nagatas live on her $621-a-month disability payments, his Social Security payments and his income as a security guard at the Skyline Casino.

Nagata says she’s not in any danger of defaulting on her mortgage.

Syphax and supporters of down-payment assistance programs have begun lobbying Congress to support Green’s bill, but he says Nehemiah has yet to approach Nevada Reps. Shelley Berkley, Dean Heller and Dina Titus.

Syphax hopes Congress will examine the Green bill as closely as members did an $8,000 tax credit for new homebuyers inserted into the economic stimulus bill. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that a revival of Nehemiah would cost the government nothing.

“Don’t you think it’s puzzling that if there’s a program that would cost zero that (Congress) would look at that program with equal intensity?” he says.

Berkley is approaching the Green bill cautiously, her spokesman David Cherry says. “She doesn’t want people to get into homes that they can’t afford.”

Sen. John Ensign will be tracking the bill, a spokesman says. Representatives for Heller and Titus did not respond to Sun inquiries, and a spokesman for the Greater Las Vegas Association of Realtors declined to comment.

Discussion: 12 comments so far…

By jfnance32

2/16/09 at 6:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

This is the type of silly stuff that got us into trouble.

If you can't saved money for a down payment then it is demostrates that you lack the ability to make monthly mortgage payments.

It artifically inflates demand which artifically inflates prices of homes and land. Speclatures enter the market to flip houses and land.

A bubble occurs that gets pop whenever there is an economic downturn or when interest rates go up and this people can't make their ARM's payments.
By Future2012

2/16/09 at 7:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

The LV Sun points out that Congress last spring stopped insuring loans where the programs were used.

The July 2008, a housing rescue law (Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 - H.R.3221) is an abysmal failure, because the Act is too complicated and too expensive for the everyday homeowner to take advantage.

Who passed this law?

The Congressional Leadership was:
- Presidential Candidate Barack Obama
- Scam land baron Majority Leader Harry Reid,
- Mortgage defrauder Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd,
- Air Force 2 frequent flyer and ardent leftista House Speaker Madam Nancy Pelosi,
- Tax dodger House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel
- Fannie/Freddie BFF House Banking Chairman Barney Franks
By neiman1

2/16/09 at 7:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Why would we want to return to the building boom of the past when everyone agrees it was bigger and higher than a market can sustain. When time takes out the inventory a real level will be reached again, unless enough illegals actually leave to make more vacancies.
By johnevegas

2/16/09 at 7:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

I'm all for this! There are so many people who will benefit from this program. What with the price of real estate being so low, there could not be a better time to re-enact it! Not only will it help the buyers, it will help us all by creating more demand for homes.

And when you look at who is against it (see Manny Moe and Jack, above), you have all the confirmation you need that this is a really good plan. These guys are ALWAYS against ANYTHING that will help people they do not like, i.e., the less fortunate.
By gotjobs

2/16/09 at 7:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Home ownership is not an entitlement. NINJA (no income, no job, no assets) you could get a loan. Stated income (tell the lender how much you make, no proof) you could get a loan. No money down? No problem. Some admittedly, whether swindled, lied, lied to or just did not understand the terms of their loan (ARM).

Want a home? You need a job or income. You need good credit. You need money down. That's the way it was for me, my parents and their parents.
By getalife

2/16/09 at 7:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

John,

If they fall on hard times are we supposed to help them with "personal stimulus" checks as well? This has disaster written all over it.
By johnevegas

2/16/09 at 7:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

"...are we supposed to help them with "personal stimulus" checks as well?"

How would that be different than the risk takers in Detroit? Why do they deserve help and these people don't?

These times are unprecedented and call for unique efforts to try and correct things.
By Gordon

2/16/09 at 8:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Not sure about the accuracy of this Sun article. According to NYT http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/busine... "Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Mr. Bush persuaded Congress to spend up to $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs. And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for federally insured mortgages with no money down. Republican Congressional leaders and some housing advocates balked, arguing that homeowners with no stake in their investments would be more prone to walk away, as Mr. West did. Many economic experts, including some in the White House, now share that view."
By jameseveritt

2/16/09 at 10:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

USA.gov - Benefits and Grants Immediate Action To Help You

Tax cuts are one means of providing economic relief to those in need and will be part of the recovery plan for America. However, Government Grants will also play a vital role as a means to swiftly provide assistance to those who could use financial assistance. Unlike a loan these Government Grants provide funds which do not need to be repaid and can be used for virtually any purpose including:

pay off family debt

consolidate debt

provide mortgage help to deal with the forclosure crisis

purchase a new home

start a new business or assist with an existing business

pay off student loans or assist new students with obtaining a degree and giving government aid

If there is a bill out there that needs to be paid there may be funding now available that will be able to cover it.

About grants.gov

Grants.gov is your source to FIND and APPLY for federal government grants. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is proud to be the managing partner for Grants.gov, an initiative that is having an unparalleled impact on the grant community. Learn more about Grants.gov and determine if you are eligible for grant opportunities offered on this site.

Grants.gov was established as a governmental resource named the E-Grants Initiative, part of the President's 2002 Fiscal Year Management Agenda to improve government services to the public.

The concept has its origins in the Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement Act of 1999, also known as Public Law 106-107. Public Law 106-107 has since sunset and is now known as the Grants Policy Committee (GPC). For more information on the Grants Policy Committee, click here.

Today, Grants.gov is a central storehouse for information on over 1,000 grant programs and provides access to approximately $500 billion in annual awards.

What is a Grant?

Who is Eligible for a Grant?

Program Highlights
Program highlights and accomplishments.

Grants.gov in the News
Articles, press releases, milestones and events.

Program Status
Detailed information about our relationship with partner federal agencies, financial contributions, grant opportunities, fiscal reports, planning strategies and statistics. USA.gov - Benefits and Grants

Useful Links, Resources, and Lesson Plans for K-12 Teachers ... featuring lesson plans and video clips ... A huge virtual meetinghouse for K-12 educators, students ... Educational_Video_Resources_for_Teachers_and_Students.rtf
By azsk8fan

2/16/09 at 10:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

I think the big issue is not whether someone has a downpayment saved - it should be about whether or not they can make the monthly payment. The people in this article are clearly better off because they're paying LESS than they were in rent and now have the benefit of being a homeowner. What can possibly be wrong with that? Not everyone is able to save up for a downpayment on a home - in normal circumstances a home is constantly appreciating in value so to save enough for a down payment is like running in circles - you can save and save and due to the appreciation of the housing market (in NORMAL circumstances) a person can never have saved enough to take the next step. I have paid 1200.00 a month faithfully and never as much as a day late for the past 9 years and I would love to find a home with a payment of 900-1000 a month to purchase. I haven't had a problem with 1200.00 to my landlord so I don't foresee I'd have a problem with paying LESS to a mortgage company. Of course anyone can lose a job and that changes the whole picture. I guess there's just no guarantees in life and even someone with a healthy bank balance can find themselves in dire straits if they're out of work long enough.
By CapoDiMasi

2/16/09 at 2:08 p.m.

Comment removed by staff.