Most Recommended Stories
Sun. April 8, 2007
1. Judge acts to deliver aid as well as justice
2. Police chief an asset to Salem
3. Another View: on the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade
4. Returning military members deserve better
5. Bill would expand time limit on medication lawsuit
6. Meaning of Easter doesn't fit in one basket
To peruse these Most Recommended Stories or the complete version of the articles which I have posted please use the internet link provided in the "Links" section of this blog. Thank you.
With this week’s chapter dealing with “urban displacement”, I thought that the possible home foreclosures of several million Americans to be relevant. I first became aware of “sub prime” lending practices by mortgage companies about six months ago, but very little has been mentioned in the news. You would think that the potential displacement of millions of families across America would be more newsworthy but apparently not.
As the article below states, last year “one in every 92 households” in America was foreclosed on. This number will most certainly increase in the very near future as 20 of the 25 major sub prime lenders in America have closed their doors. One article I read in my research named El Paso as the number one city in America where lenders used this form of mortgaging. These companies took advantage of the lack of knowledge that these working families had in regards to financing. The big winner here will be the banks that foreclose on these property loans. They will benefit not only from any increase in property value but any decrease in what is owed on the property through mortgage payments. This is just another example of how these financial institutions can control the housing market and displace the working class while increasing their profits.
I noticed that Sen. Sherwood of Oregon stated that it’s not the states role to “protect people from being stupid”. While this may be true, it is the state’s role to combat business practices that destroy his constituent’s lives! I hope that voters take notice of his comments and end his political career next election time! The other article on “Measure 37” deals with an issue that I have covered in earlier postings. Eminent domain backing politicians must make sure that just compensation is made by any real estate developers if they force people to move from their property. The rally mentioned in the article is being made to make this point. Too often across America, we have seen the government side with big business against our fellow citizens. These politicians need to be held accountable for their actions. No one should be forced from their land to make way for a new “Wal-Mart”, etc. There is a reason for the amendments to the constitution and this is one of them. The pursuit of happiness directly correlates to obtaining the “American Dream” which usually includes a piece of land. As major corporations continue to increase their stranglehold of power across America, I believe that the slumbering “Silent Majority” may soon wake up to this fact and remain silent no longer.
Well at least I can hope! Sincerely, Mark.
Sunday, April 8, 2007
Senate Looks for Ways to Protect Home-Loan Borrowers
STEVE LAW
Statesman Journal
April 5, 2007
Foreclosures among Oregon homeowners increased 40 percent last year. Many blame the rise of "subprime" lenders, who entice buyers who have weak credit and charge them stiff terms.
Now that many subprime lenders are going belly-up and causing jitters on Wall Street, housing advocates decided the time was ripe to seek new consumer protections for would-be customers.
On Wednesday, the Senate Business Committee rolled out Senate Bill 965, which would enact new safeguards for home buyers against so-called "predatory lending."
Sandy Halonen, who runs a low-income housing group in Eugene, said low-income people often are naive about financial matters.
"They can be convinced to take out a mortgage where they really have no money left over to buy food," said Halonen, the executive director of the Neighborhood Economic Development Corp.
Nearly one-third of all Oregon mortgages issued in 2005 required interest-only payments, according to the Oregon Center for Public Policy. Those buyers are banking on rising property values to boost equity in their homes.
Many people are taking out negative-amortization loans, in which their loan principal grows rather than shrinks with each payment.
Senate Bill 965 extends consumer protections for so-called High Cost Home Loans. In today's market, that would be those charging 12 percent to 14 percent interest.
The bill would bar negative-amortization loans and require clear notices about terms of the loans. Borrowers would be steered to financial counselors before taking out loans. The bill is modeled on laws passed in New Mexico and other states.
One out of every 152 Oregon households was slapped with a foreclosure notice last year, Streisinger said, a 40 percent increase from 2005. The national rate was one in every 92 households.
Sen. Larry George, R-Sherwood, panned the bill. "If someone is being deceptive, I'm with you," George said. But it's not the state's role to "protect people from being stupid," he said.
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Statesman Journal
April 5, 2007
Foreclosures among Oregon homeowners increased 40 percent last year. Many blame the rise of "subprime" lenders, who entice buyers who have weak credit and charge them stiff terms.
Now that many subprime lenders are going belly-up and causing jitters on Wall Street, housing advocates decided the time was ripe to seek new consumer protections for would-be customers.
On Wednesday, the Senate Business Committee rolled out Senate Bill 965, which would enact new safeguards for home buyers against so-called "predatory lending."
Sandy Halonen, who runs a low-income housing group in Eugene, said low-income people often are naive about financial matters.
"They can be convinced to take out a mortgage where they really have no money left over to buy food," said Halonen, the executive director of the Neighborhood Economic Development Corp.
Nearly one-third of all Oregon mortgages issued in 2005 required interest-only payments, according to the Oregon Center for Public Policy. Those buyers are banking on rising property values to boost equity in their homes.
Many people are taking out negative-amortization loans, in which their loan principal grows rather than shrinks with each payment.
Senate Bill 965 extends consumer protections for so-called High Cost Home Loans. In today's market, that would be those charging 12 percent to 14 percent interest.
The bill would bar negative-amortization loans and require clear notices about terms of the loans. Borrowers would be steered to financial counselors before taking out loans. The bill is modeled on laws passed in New Mexico and other states.
One out of every 152 Oregon households was slapped with a foreclosure notice last year, Streisinger said, a 40 percent increase from 2005. The national rate was one in every 92 households.
Sen. Larry George, R-Sherwood, panned the bill. "If someone is being deceptive, I'm with you," George said. But it's not the state's role to "protect people from being stupid," he said.
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Rally Recognizes Children Who Have Been Abused, Neglected
BY RUTH LIAO
Statesman Journal
April 4, 2007
It took one encounter with a volunteer to help Pamela Butler, who was shuttled around in foster care since she was 7 years old.
Butler, who described members of the state system as overworked and underpaid, was 15 years old when she met a court-appointed special advocate, or CASA.
"I wasn't looking forward to repeating my life story for someone who wouldn't be there for more than two weeks," Butler said. "But I was wrong."
Now a college senior at the University of Oregon, Butler is on track to graduate with degrees in Spanish and business. Butler credited the foster-care support network for her turnaround.
Cordoned off by yellow police tape near the Capitol entrance were 18 baby seats, toddler chairs and rocking chairs. Each represented a child who died as a result of abuse or neglect in Oregon in 2005. In Marion and Polk counties, 1,808 confirmed victims of child abuse were reported in 2005, enough children to fill 32 school buses.
Marion County Circuit Court Judge Pamela Abernethy, who oversees the juvenile services and foster-care system, also spoke at Tuesday's rally.
Nurturing a healthy relationship between a parent and a child is crucial for early childhood development, Abernethy said. She held up her right hand in a fist.
"It's like a hand born without fingers," she said. "The physical architecture of the brain depends on that relationship.
Northeast Salem resident Nancy Boaz held her grandson Jayson during the rally. She said her daughter Melissa receives services through Healthy Start, and encouraged the rest of her family to attend. Boaz said reporting child abuse should be a responsibility for every adult and other children who know or hear about it.
"A lot of kids are neglected and people don't even help," Boaz said.
rliao@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6941
Statesman Journal
April 4, 2007
It took one encounter with a volunteer to help Pamela Butler, who was shuttled around in foster care since she was 7 years old.
Butler, who described members of the state system as overworked and underpaid, was 15 years old when she met a court-appointed special advocate, or CASA.
"I wasn't looking forward to repeating my life story for someone who wouldn't be there for more than two weeks," Butler said. "But I was wrong."
Now a college senior at the University of Oregon, Butler is on track to graduate with degrees in Spanish and business. Butler credited the foster-care support network for her turnaround.
Cordoned off by yellow police tape near the Capitol entrance were 18 baby seats, toddler chairs and rocking chairs. Each represented a child who died as a result of abuse or neglect in Oregon in 2005. In Marion and Polk counties, 1,808 confirmed victims of child abuse were reported in 2005, enough children to fill 32 school buses.
Marion County Circuit Court Judge Pamela Abernethy, who oversees the juvenile services and foster-care system, also spoke at Tuesday's rally.
Nurturing a healthy relationship between a parent and a child is crucial for early childhood development, Abernethy said. She held up her right hand in a fist.
"It's like a hand born without fingers," she said. "The physical architecture of the brain depends on that relationship.
Northeast Salem resident Nancy Boaz held her grandson Jayson during the rally. She said her daughter Melissa receives services through Healthy Start, and encouraged the rest of her family to attend. Boaz said reporting child abuse should be a responsibility for every adult and other children who know or hear about it.
"A lot of kids are neglected and people don't even help," Boaz said.
rliao@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6941
Changes to "Double Majority" Tax-Measure Pass House
The Associated Press
April 6, 2007
Oregonians would get to vote on amending the state's "double majority" requirements for tax measures, under a resolution that passed the House on Thursday on a 46-11 vote and is headed to the Senate.
The double majority was added to the Oregon Constitution in 1996. Measures to raise property taxes need not just a majority vote, but also voter turnout of at least 50 percent of registered voters.
If turnout falls below that threshold, the measure fails.
The proposed fix would eliminate the double majority requirement in elections held in May and November, which backers said would give school districts and local governments two fair shots each year at passing a tax measure on its merits.
House Majority Leader Dave Hunt, D-Gladstone, said the current system concentrates too much power in the hands of nonvoters, who have on occasion campaigned to persuade people not to vote, to tamp down turnout.
"The will of a majority of voters should carry the day," Hunt said.
Backers of the double majority call it a safeguard against allowing a minority of motivated voters to put a financial burden on an entire community. And they say it helps guard against "sneak attack" elections, when cities or school districts put a measure on the ballot with little warning.
Hunt and others said that since the advent of vote by mail, there's no such thing as a low-profile Oregon election.
If the resolution passes, it would be on the ballot in November 2008.
April 6, 2007
Oregonians would get to vote on amending the state's "double majority" requirements for tax measures, under a resolution that passed the House on Thursday on a 46-11 vote and is headed to the Senate.
The double majority was added to the Oregon Constitution in 1996. Measures to raise property taxes need not just a majority vote, but also voter turnout of at least 50 percent of registered voters.
If turnout falls below that threshold, the measure fails.
The proposed fix would eliminate the double majority requirement in elections held in May and November, which backers said would give school districts and local governments two fair shots each year at passing a tax measure on its merits.
House Majority Leader Dave Hunt, D-Gladstone, said the current system concentrates too much power in the hands of nonvoters, who have on occasion campaigned to persuade people not to vote, to tamp down turnout.
"The will of a majority of voters should carry the day," Hunt said.
Backers of the double majority call it a safeguard against allowing a minority of motivated voters to put a financial burden on an entire community. And they say it helps guard against "sneak attack" elections, when cities or school districts put a measure on the ballot with little warning.
Hunt and others said that since the advent of vote by mail, there's no such thing as a low-profile Oregon election.
If the resolution passes, it would be on the ballot in November 2008.
Supporters of "Measure 37" Hold Rally
April 7, 2007
Advocates of change to Oregon's property-compensation law, which voters passed in 2004 as Measure 37, will muster their supporters for a rally.
The rally will be from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. April 14 on the Capitol front steps.
Among the scheduled speakers are Rep. Greg Macpherson, D-Lake Oswego, the co-chairman of the joint legislative committee working on a bill to modify the ballot measure and the son of Hector Macpherson, a state senator from Albany who was the co-author of Oregon's land-use planning law in 1973.
Others include Mike Carrier, the natural-resource policy director for Gov. Ted Kulongoski; state Rep. Brian Clem, D-Salem, a member of the joint committee; Bob Stacey, the executive director of the land-use watchdog 1,000 Friends of Oregon, and several farmers.
Measure 37 requires governments to pay landowners or waive rules when those rules result in reduced property values.
-- Peter Wong
Advocates of change to Oregon's property-compensation law, which voters passed in 2004 as Measure 37, will muster their supporters for a rally.
The rally will be from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. April 14 on the Capitol front steps.
Among the scheduled speakers are Rep. Greg Macpherson, D-Lake Oswego, the co-chairman of the joint legislative committee working on a bill to modify the ballot measure and the son of Hector Macpherson, a state senator from Albany who was the co-author of Oregon's land-use planning law in 1973.
Others include Mike Carrier, the natural-resource policy director for Gov. Ted Kulongoski; state Rep. Brian Clem, D-Salem, a member of the joint committee; Bob Stacey, the executive director of the land-use watchdog 1,000 Friends of Oregon, and several farmers.
Measure 37 requires governments to pay landowners or waive rules when those rules result in reduced property values.
-- Peter Wong
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sun. April 1, 2007
1.Team works to aid victims of meth abuse
2.Leave schools for blind and deaf independent
3.Community colleges worth the investment
4.Part 1: Saigon and Mui Nei Beach, Vietnam
5.Keep trash from sullying state's natural beauty
6.Hispanic community leaders riled by fight title
To read these articles please click onto the link provided in the "Links" section of this blog.
There are two articles from this week’s news that I would like to comment about. First the article entitled “Americans want to see all illegal immigrants deported.” Obviously the person who wrote this editorial is not familiar with the services that are provided by many of these so called “illegal immigrants” here in the U.S. Not only is it logistically and economically next to impossible to achieve this goal it would create a major problem for many industrial and agricultural businesses. These undocumented workers provide cheap labor in the harvesting of crops and the garment industry to name just a few. This cheap labor, in turn directly reflects of the prices that we pay when we shop. If these people were deported we would see many necessary goods double or triple in cost virtually overnight. While I firmly believe that our boarders need to be protected from individuals crossing who seek to do us harm it should not be at the expense of hardworking immigrants who are only seeking a better way of life for themselves and their families. There needs to be a major immigration policy change that would enable migrant workers to provide these services and return to their country of origin without fear of reprisals. The second article entitled “Salem-based Sunwest faces suit by residents is also very troubling. The care that many of our elderly are receiving in some of these facilities is reprehensible at best. As the baby boomer generation nears retirement age there will be an unprecedented need for elderly care here in the U.S. I understand the need for profit by these businesses but to jeopardize the health and well being of this age cohort is unconscionable. I have worked in geriatrics in the past and the major reason for quitting my job was exactly what this article stated. I was responsible for the care of over 30 residents by myself and it is impossible for one person to provide to services required in an eight hour shift. I was expected to get these people ready for breakfast (bathed, shaved, dressed, etc.) in 45 minutes. Many were ambulatory and able to care for themselves, but the 10 or so that needed one on one care could not be properly attended to in the time frame allotted. Needless to say I did not last long at this facility. If these institutions cannot provide adequate staff now what will happen when the number of residents increases exponentially 20 years from now?
Sun. April 1, 2007
1.Team works to aid victims of meth abuse
2.Leave schools for blind and deaf independent
3.Community colleges worth the investment
4.Part 1: Saigon and Mui Nei Beach, Vietnam
5.Keep trash from sullying state's natural beauty
6.Hispanic community leaders riled by fight title
To read these articles please click onto the link provided in the "Links" section of this blog.
There are two articles from this week’s news that I would like to comment about. First the article entitled “Americans want to see all illegal immigrants deported.” Obviously the person who wrote this editorial is not familiar with the services that are provided by many of these so called “illegal immigrants” here in the U.S. Not only is it logistically and economically next to impossible to achieve this goal it would create a major problem for many industrial and agricultural businesses. These undocumented workers provide cheap labor in the harvesting of crops and the garment industry to name just a few. This cheap labor, in turn directly reflects of the prices that we pay when we shop. If these people were deported we would see many necessary goods double or triple in cost virtually overnight. While I firmly believe that our boarders need to be protected from individuals crossing who seek to do us harm it should not be at the expense of hardworking immigrants who are only seeking a better way of life for themselves and their families. There needs to be a major immigration policy change that would enable migrant workers to provide these services and return to their country of origin without fear of reprisals. The second article entitled “Salem-based Sunwest faces suit by residents is also very troubling. The care that many of our elderly are receiving in some of these facilities is reprehensible at best. As the baby boomer generation nears retirement age there will be an unprecedented need for elderly care here in the U.S. I understand the need for profit by these businesses but to jeopardize the health and well being of this age cohort is unconscionable. I have worked in geriatrics in the past and the major reason for quitting my job was exactly what this article stated. I was responsible for the care of over 30 residents by myself and it is impossible for one person to provide to services required in an eight hour shift. I was expected to get these people ready for breakfast (bathed, shaved, dressed, etc.) in 45 minutes. Many were ambulatory and able to care for themselves, but the 10 or so that needed one on one care could not be properly attended to in the time frame allotted. Needless to say I did not last long at this facility. If these institutions cannot provide adequate staff now what will happen when the number of residents increases exponentially 20 years from now?
Saturday, March 31, 2007
New Housing May Fund Schools
STEVE LAW
Statesman Journal
March 25, 2007
The llamas and filbert trees are gone near West Salem High School, to be replaced by 700 new homes.
Lisa Nair scans those buildable lots in her neighborhood and worries what they portend for her daughter's school. "You see these homes going in, and there's no school being built to provide classrooms for these kids," she said.
Nair and other West Salem parents have one remedy: put a fee on every new home going in.
Salem and other cities and counties across Oregon levy "system development charges" on new homes and other construction to pay for roads, parks, sewers and water systems that serve the new homes. But state law bans local governments from charging development fees for schools, in part because of the lobbying clout of the home-building industry.
In high-growth areas such as West Salem and South Salem, many residents think that's unfair, especially as they see droves of newcomers cause crowding in neighborhood schools.
Senate Bill 366, introduced this session and referred to the Finance and Revenue Committee, would allow school districts to set an impact fee, or system development charge, on new homes or lots. It does not require that fees be set or say how much they would be.
It's crucial to site schools close to where students live, said Heitsch, a co-leader of the school district's Facilities Task Force. More parents can attend teacher conferences. Students can attend after-school activities and devote more time to homework instead of riding buses. The school becomes a stronger center of community life.
Development fees could give school districts the financial means to set aside land, rather than wait for voters to OK a bond measure, Heitsch said.
Senate Bill 366 would require that development fees be spent only to meet the demands of new growth. The money could not be spent merely to replace an aging facility.
Homebuilders and allied industry groups have long opposed school development fees because they raise the price of a new house or cut into their profits.
Salem already charges nearly $12,000 per house for development fees. So far this year, the average West Salem home is selling for $293,550, according to the Willamette Valley Multiple Listing Service. In South Salem, it's $323,339.
Homebuilders are quick to point out that development fees would cover only about 25 percent of the cost of a new school, by some estimates. And some school officials worry that voters will be less prone to support school bond measures if there are school development fees, figuring that those should cover the costs.
Bond measures are the traditional way that school districts pay for new classrooms, but they've gotten much tougher to pass in elections since Oregon voters approved the Measure 47 property tax initiative in 1996.
Eleven other states allow development fees for schools, and eight other states have an alternative mechanism, Hepper said. The group senses that the time is ripe to erase Oregon's ban on school development fees, with so many bond measures going down and Democrats back in control of the Legislature.
Berger said local communities should "step up" and pay for school construction, rather than trying to raise the price of homes by tacking on more development fees. Loosening the double-majority requirement will enable local taxpayers to do more of their share, she said.
Although legislative committees have begun hearings on development fees, the real action is going on behind the scenes in negotiations with homebuilders, Stand for Children and other forces.
Hepper argues that development fees could help the housing industry and parents.
"The benefit for both," he said, "is you buy a house and sell a house in a school district that has good schools."
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Statesman Journal
March 25, 2007
The llamas and filbert trees are gone near West Salem High School, to be replaced by 700 new homes.
Lisa Nair scans those buildable lots in her neighborhood and worries what they portend for her daughter's school. "You see these homes going in, and there's no school being built to provide classrooms for these kids," she said.
Nair and other West Salem parents have one remedy: put a fee on every new home going in.
Salem and other cities and counties across Oregon levy "system development charges" on new homes and other construction to pay for roads, parks, sewers and water systems that serve the new homes. But state law bans local governments from charging development fees for schools, in part because of the lobbying clout of the home-building industry.
In high-growth areas such as West Salem and South Salem, many residents think that's unfair, especially as they see droves of newcomers cause crowding in neighborhood schools.
Senate Bill 366, introduced this session and referred to the Finance and Revenue Committee, would allow school districts to set an impact fee, or system development charge, on new homes or lots. It does not require that fees be set or say how much they would be.
It's crucial to site schools close to where students live, said Heitsch, a co-leader of the school district's Facilities Task Force. More parents can attend teacher conferences. Students can attend after-school activities and devote more time to homework instead of riding buses. The school becomes a stronger center of community life.
Development fees could give school districts the financial means to set aside land, rather than wait for voters to OK a bond measure, Heitsch said.
Senate Bill 366 would require that development fees be spent only to meet the demands of new growth. The money could not be spent merely to replace an aging facility.
Homebuilders and allied industry groups have long opposed school development fees because they raise the price of a new house or cut into their profits.
Salem already charges nearly $12,000 per house for development fees. So far this year, the average West Salem home is selling for $293,550, according to the Willamette Valley Multiple Listing Service. In South Salem, it's $323,339.
Homebuilders are quick to point out that development fees would cover only about 25 percent of the cost of a new school, by some estimates. And some school officials worry that voters will be less prone to support school bond measures if there are school development fees, figuring that those should cover the costs.
Bond measures are the traditional way that school districts pay for new classrooms, but they've gotten much tougher to pass in elections since Oregon voters approved the Measure 47 property tax initiative in 1996.
Eleven other states allow development fees for schools, and eight other states have an alternative mechanism, Hepper said. The group senses that the time is ripe to erase Oregon's ban on school development fees, with so many bond measures going down and Democrats back in control of the Legislature.
Berger said local communities should "step up" and pay for school construction, rather than trying to raise the price of homes by tacking on more development fees. Loosening the double-majority requirement will enable local taxpayers to do more of their share, she said.
Although legislative committees have begun hearings on development fees, the real action is going on behind the scenes in negotiations with homebuilders, Stand for Children and other forces.
Hepper argues that development fees could help the housing industry and parents.
"The benefit for both," he said, "is you buy a house and sell a house in a school district that has good schools."
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)