Comment

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on July 9, 2012 at 5:16am

Agree Dennis.  The only part I don't get is the partnership word.  We aren't partners at all; we are simply offering up another handout with no notable over sight for the taxpayers (many of who probably did without and carefully budgeted their own money to SAVE their own down payment for a home).  I would wonder if this isn't for the benefit of people like the couple who bought a house in our neighborhood that had always lived in apartments and then, we slowly watched the house deteriate as they were clueless how to fix anything or to manage the upkeep of the house.  They were nice people, their children were lovely, but they got duped into buying a house they couldn't afford, and then, after going out and buying 2 brand new SUVs the week after they moved in, struggled to make the payments, worked 2 jobs trying to hold on, and finally decided a house was too expensive and too much work and the house was repo'd.   It also destroyed their marriage which might have been left in tact had they just been left alone and not convinced they just had to own their own house.

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on July 9, 2012 at 4:59am

Amanda, more of the liberal rhetoric. "Previous failed" options? Really. You mean the ones that were in place before we were taken to the brink of bankrupcy by the liberal policies of the last 2 or 3 mayors? We are talking about more programs that take our tax dollars and inject them into situations where they government does not belong. This is not their job. Leave it to private companies and non profits. As it is our local government does not have the time to properly oversee the things they are supposed to do, have a union pension fund that is a disaster due to the policies of mayors who just agreed to anything and everything and kicked the can down the road time and again. The failed policies were not the ones from the past that stayed within the confines governments are supposed to stay in; the policies that are failed are the over reaching wasteful ones currently in place................you have been drinking the koolaid and are now pumping nothing but empty "parroted" undefined and certainly unsubstantiated rhetoric.

Comment by Dennis J. Fleming on July 8, 2012 at 8:26pm

If I understand correctly $15,000 of taxpayer funds will be given to Wellls Fargo for each person who gets into the program.  It is not the responsibility of one taxpayer to make the down payment for other people.

Perhaps home ownership is not the answer for everyone.  Home ownership can be expensive and difficult if the owner does not have the skill to maintain the property.

This looks like another program where a public official transfers taxpayer money to a private partner.

Comment by amanda choate on July 8, 2012 at 5:02pm

It lowers the inventory, good for everyone. Rehabs homes, which means construction jobs. Puts people in homes they can afford, they are vested in success. This is what a three pronged approach looks like, private for profit, local government, private non-profit. Each with different goals and needs in balance. It is up to us to make sure it works, stay involved. But to dismiss it out of hand leaves only previous failed options as options.