Stay up to date on current News & Issues.
NAR responds to administration proposal to reform Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
Bensalem approves 106 more townhouses at Waterside community
Embreeville Redevelopment zoning hearing postponed
SEPTA upgrades Secane station
New Hanover Town Center project raising concern
Center City developers benefit the most from city’s tax abatement
Much has been written over the past year about a proposed new education funding formula for Pennsylvania schools. As reported, the new formula would mark an important first step on the road to getting the state’s dysfunctional education funding system back on the right track. Most importantly, the funding formula promises to put school districts throughout the Commonwealth on more equal ground when it comes to education appropriations from the state.
If enacted by the legislature and Gov. Tom Wolf, the new formula will: 1) provide funding based on the average number of students in each district over the past three years; 2) give extra funding for impoverished students and English language learners in each district; 3) consider the number of students attending charter schools in a district to help cover the cost of revenue that follows students to those schools; and 4) factor in median household income, the local tax burden and taxing capacity of each district to help gauge the population’s ability to generate school funding. All of these steps will help ease the tremendous burden that poorer school districts in our region have faced over the past several years because no formula has been in place in the state.
REALTORS® should strongly consider supporting this new formula because it will help eliminate some of the inequities in state funding that have caused property taxes to soar in certain districts, making homes in those localities extremely hard to sell. But even this major reform, worked out over the past year, can’t save school districts and tax payers from major budgetary pain ahead without further heavy lifting by state lawmakers who have been reluctant to make tough choices. First and foremost on the priority list after the funding formula is in place is reform of the state’s public pension system, which threatens to place a heavy burden on taxpayers and deplete funds available for critical long-term investments – including education – if left untouched.
While there is some disagreement regarding what should be done to fix the system, most experts agree that years of large benefit increases, negligent underfunding, and several recessions have left the state's public pension funds in a huge budget hole. It is estimated that the two largest pension systems in the state – covering teachers and other government employees—are underfunded by more than $50 billion dollars.
How serious is this issue? The PA Institute of Certified Public Accountants says that at the state level, taxpayer contributions to pension plans will increase to $3.3 billion, or nearly 10 percent of the budget, by 2020. That’s compared to the $1.7 billion, or 6 percent of the budget, made in contributions this year. According to the CPAs, that rate of debt increase is “fiscally unsustainable and will prove increasingly unacceptable to taxpayers who must either pay increased taxes or forgo other services to pay for these liabilities.”
The effect of the pension crisis on school districts is already being felt. Beginning this month, the annual contribution level for districts to the pension fund will jump to 25.8%, up from 16.9% only two years ago. By 2019-20, that number will skyrocket to 32.2%. The fact that school districts are being asked to pay for more and more of the pension costs has much to do with the growing property tax burden we are feeling at the local level in southeastern PA. And much like the added government spending needed to cover entitlement debt at the federal level in the massive Social Security and Medicare programs, these school pension liabilities are beginning to “crowd out” investments that are needed to ensure a strong work force for the future of the Commonwealth.
What’s needed to fix the system? Many pension and budget experts agree that moving new employees into a defined contribution plan with 401(k)-style benefits would be a good first step. A tougher, more impactful fix might include rolling back benefit formula changes that some experts say helped produce the present-day crisis. Looking to other states that have dealt more effectively with their own pension challenges will also be critical.
As both citizens of the state and small business owners, REALTORS should strongly consider voicing their support for legislators who make the tough choices necessary to put the pension system back on a sustainable path before it’s too late.
A recent poll conducted by the National Association of Home Builders and Wells Fargo highlighted the concern of home builders across the country over constantly tightening construction codes. It seems that approximately 35 percent of home builders recently polled are “extremely concerned” that construction codes are making new construction cost prohibitive “without a measurable improvement in safety or other benefits.”
Based on the stories we hear from our members on a weekly basis, I think it’s safe to say that home builders and REALTORS have much in common when it comes to feeling frustrated over building code creep. But while home builders are mostly concerned with codes that govern new home construction, our members must contend with the wildly inconsistent enforcement of building and property maintenance codes by municipalities at the point-of-sale (POS).
How difficult do some municipalities in southeastern PA make it to sell a home within their borders? According to our Realtor Association colleagues across the country, there are very few areas that face the same crazy rules and regulations regarding the sale of private property. So you want to sell your historic property in Caln Township? Better hope it meets the over-the-top standards of one of the strictest code enforcement departments in the region. Does your client live in Downingtown Borough? They may be required to replace the sidewalk, even if it’s only slightly worn. In Eddystone, be prepared for a team of municipal inspectors to descend on your client’s property on multiple occasions, and for those inspectors to find previously “missed” violations on follow-up visits. Are you selling a home to a rental property investor in Marcus Hook or Lower Chichester? That’ll be $5,000 to $10,000 for a new fire sprinkler system, please.
That’s the problem with the way municipalities are allowed to enforce property maintenance and building codes at the point-of-sale in Pennsylvania. While the state does have a “Uniform Construction Code” (UCC) in place for building and renovating homes, there is no such law that ensures a consistent standard for municipal home inspections. Worse yet, there is currently no fair way for home sellers or buyers to challenge an overzealous municipal code department that has decided to run rampant over their real estate transaction. When a township code inspector, manager or solicitor tells your client to “go ahead and sue us” if you want to challenge a particular demand, it’s all too clear that they’re holding the best hand.
So where do we go from here? The fact that we do have a uniform code in Pennsylvania for new construction gives me hope that a similar state-wide law may be possible for governing point-of-sale inspections. This type of law could include limitations on the scope of such inspections, and clearer guidelines for inspecting older homes. It could include strict limitations on the fees that municipalities can charge for such inspections, and set a stronger licensing standard for code officials. A ban on the absurd practice of requiring expensive infrastructure repairs – such as sidewalk and sewer lateral replacements – only at the point-of-sale would be a welcome addition to such a law. Finally, the law could set up a clear arbitration process – not controlled by the municipality or county – for instances in which home sellers or buyers feel the need to challenge a municipal code ruling without having to spend thousands of dollars on a lawsuit.
What are the chances of a municipal resale inspection law passing the PA legislature? With the UCC already in force for new construction, there is a strong precedent for this type of regulation. Is there language you’d like to see in such a law? Send your ideas to email@example.com
By Jamie Ridge, president/ceo, Suburban REALTORS Alliance
Here at the Suburban REALTORS Alliance (SRA) we’ve noticed a significant increase in REALTOR-awareness regarding municipal “point-of-sale” inspection requirements since the Marchlaunch of our “This Doesn’t Make Sense” campaign and website. This increased awareness has led to some very questionable municipal point-of-sale practices being brought to light by our members, and successfully challenged by the SRA.
In Chester County we learned that two boroughs – Phoenixville and Downingtown – were refusing to issue temporary use and occupancy certificates for required repairs that a buyer had agreed to complete after a sale. In both instances, the boroughs were in violation of the Pennsylvania Municipal Code and Ordinance Compliance Act (MCOCA), which states that: “a municipality shall not refuse to issue a use and occupancy certificate … on the basis of a substantial violation or require the correction of a substantial violation as a condition to issuing a use and occupancy certificate … unless the substantial violation renders the property unfit for habitation.”
After SRA staff reached out to each borough, they began issuing temporary certificates that allow real estate transactions to move forward.
In Delaware County, where the vast majority of municipalities have some form of point-of-sale inspection requirement, increased member input has allowed us to address Ridley Township’s refusal to issue temporary use and occupancy certificates for sidewalk repairs. Once again, township staff seemed unaware of the state law that requires the issuance of temporary certificates unless a property is being condemned.
Perhaps our favorite “success” story this year involves Suburban West member Nick Vandekar, who is also a member of the SRA’s board of directors. Nick was in the process of closing a deal in East Norriton Township in Montgomery County when their codes department mentioned a required sewer lateral repair and a hefty escrow requirement to allow a temporary U & O certificate.
Being quick on his feet, Nick was able to encourage a conversation between East Norriton staff and SRA staff. After being provided with an explanation of the enforcement tools that the Code and Ordinance Compliance Act provides to townships when home owners don’t comply with the terms of a temporary U & O permit, the township dropped their escrow requirement for Nick’s transaction, and future transactions. We think that is teamwork at its best!
The ultimate goal of the ‘This Doesn’t Make Sense’ campaign is to not only raise our members’ awareness of these issues, but also public awareness. By sharing the campaign website with your neighbors and clients, you can help us accomplish this goal. Once on the website – www.thisdoesntmakesense.org – guests can find information about the point-of-sale requirements in their municipality, and even send a pre-written message to their elected official about why these local real estate regulations do more harm than good.
When more of our local elected officials begin receiving these messages from residents of their townships and boroughs, perhaps they’ll think twice about introducing any further point-of-sale requirements. Even better, maybe they will strongly consider repealing inspection ordinances that are already in place.
After all, at a time when the economy is still recovering and home sales are just beginning to perk up, the last thing we need is more barriers to real estate transactions.
Based on a recent statement by President Obama and activity in Congress, it appears that Washington may finally be inching toward reforming secondary mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. While very few elected officials and market experts dispute the need for reform, opinions of how it should be accomplished vary greatly. For future home owners and the REALTORS® who will serve their home buying and selling needs, the details of the final reform plan will matter a great deal.
To date, lawmakers in Washington appear to be aligning themselves with two different reform camps. The first, led by the president and a bipartisan group of moderate legislators, favors reforms that would significantly restructure the secondary mortgage market, while maintaining a critical role for the federal government. The second, led by conservatives in the House and Senate, would end the government’s long-time role as a guarantor in the secondary market altogether, leaving serious doubt that market liquidity would be maintained by private market entities during tough economic times.
The National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) has stated its opposition to the latter reform plan in terms that are loud and clear. According to 2013 NAR President Gary Thomas, “NAR supports a comprehensive approach to restructuring the secondary mortgage market, including winding down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but believes any new secondary market entity replacing the enterprises must have an explicit government guarantee.”
Without that guarantee, Thomas correctly argues, the nation’s $10 trillion mortgage market could lose a functioning secondary market, leading to its ultimate collapse. The impact of that collapse would result in a dramatic destruction of wealth for middle class Americans that would see the value of their homes fall significantly. The lack of a functioning secondary market would also lead to mortgage rates that are unnecessarily high and unaffordable for many Americans.
While NAR does argue that a federal guarantee is a necessary ingredient of any successful reform effort, it also warns against a restoration of the old, broken system. That system, unfortunately, resulted in the creation of two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – whose shareholders pushed private profits without demonstrating any concern for taxpayer losses.
Rather than an attempt to “fix” Fannie and Freddie, NAR is recommending that the president and Congress work toward the creation of new entities that are government-chartered, non-shareholder owned, and subject to strong oversight that “ensures they can accomplish their mission and protect the taxpayer.”
Along with the top priorities of protecting taxpayers and ensuring mortgage liquidity at all times, NAR is advocating for the following:
The American economy and individual home owners have benefitted greatly over the past 70 years from the stable source of mortgage funding provided through the government sponsored enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Let’s hope that their shocking failures, ultimately brought on by a harsh recession and too much focus on shareholder profit over taxpayer protection, has created enough urgency in Washington to introduce meaningful reforms that will help us avoid another such calamity.
The result of such a reform effort, if it can be accomplished by a Congress and president that haven’t proven their ability to accomplish much lately, would be a new and improved secondary mortgage market that could help sustain home ownership and the national economy into the distant future.
Jamie Ridge is president/CEO of the Suburban REALTORS Alliance