Petition to Jenny Durkin
Tell Seattle City council hands off my property ! For Seattle homeowners only
Seattle homeowners and landlords: do you agree with the City councils measures to: bar you from rejecting people based on criminal history, bar you from rejecting tenants based on income and allowing tenants to pay their move in costs over time? We are all aware of the rising costs to live in Seattle, but many feel these measures are unfair and do not allow them to secure their property. Many feel Seattle has become unfriendly to landlords and people renting rooms. If you would like to see this change or you are happy with the decisions, please add your name and comments to be delivered to the City council and mayors office. We would like 10,000 signatures to be sent to the mayor and City council.
Petition to Todd Spitzer (Orange County Board of Supervisors 3rd District), Mayor Mike Munzing, Mayor Tom Tait, Mayor Christine Marick, Mayor Fred R. Smith, Mayor Stephen Mensinger, Mayor Mariellen Yarc, Mayor Cheryl Brothers, Mayor Bao Nguyen, Mayor Jim Katapodis, Mayor Gerard Goedhart, Mayor Barbara Kogerman, Mayor Andrew Hamilton, Mayor Diane Dixon, Mayor Jeremy B. Yamaguchi, Mayor L. Anthony Beall, Mayor Miguel Pulido, Mayor Brian Donahue, Mayor John Nielsen, Mayor Tri Ta, Mayor Steve Dicterow, Mayor Bob Baker , Lisa A. Bartlett, Michelle Steel, Andrew Do, Shawn Nelson
Stop Careless Lending & Tax Defaults: Stricter Guidelines for PACE Loans
Making unaffordable loans based on the assets of the borrower rather than on the borrower’s ability to repay an obligation = PREDATORY LENDING Inducing a borrower to refinance a loan repeatedly in order to charge high points and fees each time the loan is refinanced (loan flipping) = PREDATORY LENDING Engaging in fraud or deception to conceal the true nature of the loan obligation, or ancillary products, from an unsuspecting or unsophisticated borrower = PREDATORY LENDING I, Lacy Robertson a Mortgage and Real Estate professional with over 14 years of experience am asking for stricter financing guidelines when approving homeowners that seek to finance energy and water efficient products. This request is in an effort to prevent another financial housing melt down. Too many people have lost their homes to unfair, careless lending practices and we don't need any more families to lose their most expensive asset they own or will ever own! When you seek to finance a car or a house it is customary to provide debt and income information to the financing company in an effort to make sure you have sufficient income to repay the loan back for the benefit of both the consumer and investor. This is where your help is needed!!! Right now homeowners can apply to finance energy-efficient products with PACE loans without providing any type of documentation that would show their ability to repay the loan. Not only is financing available but 100% financing is available. 100% financing on large purchase item(s) to consumers without considering their ability to repay the loan is not only risky but a recipe for disaster!!! What does 100% financing remind you of… Oh no, this sounds like adjustable rate mortgages being approved only at the minimum payment and never at the fully amortized highest contractual payment. When lenders failed to see if an applicant could afford the highest payment amount under the loan it led to mortgages falling into default at record numbers once the payment adjusted. The same is true if you fail to evaluate a consumer’s ability to repay PACE loans based on their income, debt and actual projected savings. It is only a matter of time, if stricter financing guidelines are not put in place that homeowners will be forced to default on their property taxes and mortgage payments that include property taxes. Why? Because They Can’t Pay!!! Homeowners tend to upgrade to energy-efficient products in an effort to save money on their utility bills. If sufficient guidelines are not in place to ensure that when a homeowner finances energy and water efficient products they can both pay the loan and save money then we are voluntarily creating another housing crisis but I HAVE GOOD NEWS YOU CAN HELP by signing the petition! Based on my research and cases that I have come across PACE loans do not require any type of income and liability documentation before approving financing and at the very least this is careless and shows that the finance company doesn’t care if a consumer can afford to pay the loan because they now have collateral to back the loan classified as a Hero Property Tax Assessment which also creates a senior position lien or 1st position lien recorded against your property. Yikes, if the homeowners can’t pay this loan, they will most likely lose their home or be forced to sell, when their original intention was trying to save money. PACE loans also don’t require that a homeowner at least saves a certain amount of money monthly/yearly when upgrading to energy and water efficient products. Without this due diligence, there is no guarantee that the products are actually beneficial to them. When a finance company fails to insure a consumer’s beneficial interest, you have a case where consumers are taken advantage of like during the refinance boom years. Many homeowners were refinancing their properties over and over again with virtually no significant benefit to them and the only party that benefited was the lender. I need your help! You need my help! We need each other’s help! Stop the careless lending of PACE loans. It is time that we demand strict financing guidelines to protect our homes and our families. Everything that is legal is not ethical but together we can prevent finance companies from taking advantage of homeowners in a legal but unethical way! Stand Up For Your Families by signing this petition, sharing it with everyone you know and encouraging them to do the same! We CAN make a difference.
Petition to Paul Koretz, Shawn Bayliss
Petition for Fair Re-Zoning Rules of South Beverlywood Adjacent/Castle Heights Homes
Dear Neighbors: The City is about to implement new zoning rules of either R1V2 or BMO, both of which are unfavorable for our neighborhood (South Beverlywood Adjacent/Castle Heights; see map, red section). These rules will drastically restrict our ability to renovate/expand/rebuild, and reduce our property value, without making a difference in restraining mansionization. Our area is singled out for far more restrictive rules than Beverlywood to our north and Cheviot Hills to our west. Our councilmember Paul Koretz is open to giving us the same fair rule of R1VNew as granted to them, as long as he hears from enough of us. The City will decide in early January 2017, so please sign the petition ASAP, and tell your neighbors. Why should you care? DRAMATICALLY LIMIT RENOVATIONS OR EXPANSIONS: The City is currently considering for us either the R1V2 or the BMO rule, both of which will reduce the living area, or the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) between 45% FAR down to 35% FAR. For example, a 4200 sq. ft. lot is limited to less than 1700 sq. ft. of living space, hardly enough for three bedrooms. THIS WILL DECREASE THE VALUE OF YOUR PROPERTY: Land on which you cannot build is not worth much. So when you want to sell, take out a second mortgage, or leave something valuable to your children, R1V2/BMO will reduce the value of what is probably your most important asset. UNFAIR—ALL SURROUNDING AREAS GET BETTER RULES: For example, Beverlywood north of us, and Inner Council District 5 (Cheviot Hills) west of us, get the better R1VNew rules (55% FAR). Why should our area be singled out for harsher rules? THIS WILL AFFECT YOU IN THE FUTURE: You might not think about expanding now, but the rules will be in place for 30 years or more. If at any time in the future you need more bedrooms for kids, take in your aging parents, or want a home office, R1V2/BMO will prohibit you. NO IMPACT ON MANSIONIZATION PREVENTION: We are all concerned about mansionization, but whether it's R1V2/BMO or R1VNew, it will prevent huge ugly boxes — the rules for height, setbacks from neighbor properties, etc., are almost identical. The key difference is living area, which is important for the inhabitants of the house while hardly affecting the neighbors! In summary, we are asking our Councilmember Paul Koretz to carve out our area (proposed red section in the attached map) from the Lower Council District 5 (in which we belong now) and requesting that we are allowed the same R1VNew zoning as Beverlywood and Inner Council District 5. This will allow a maximum 55% FAR for lots less than 6,000 sq. ft., and scale down in several steps, down to 45% FAR for lots 10,000 sq. ft. By signing the petition, I am voicing my opposition to the proposed R1V2/BMO re-zoning rules, and in favor of R1VNew for the South Beverlywood Adjacent/Castle Heights neighborhood. Who we are: We are Andy, Betty, Adam, and Michael, a group of homeowners living in the area. None of us is a developer, or has connections to developers. We just want fair and reasonable rules for the neighborhood we live in. For more information, visit www.LCD5zoning.net, or send an email to email@example.com
Petition to OwnersandManagers@rebny.com
No more BS, NYC needs RLS (One Feed).
All firms in New York City, large and small, need to come together and openly share the information they work so diligently to procure. A single feed (RLS) provided by the Real Estate Board of New York (REBNY) will allow us all to provide our clients and customers with best in class service. We may be independent contractors, but this is not a time to act independently. To miss an opportunity like this to best serve the public interests is shortsighted and selfish. We must come together and demand that this happens immediately. Act now. Demand participation in one feed from your broker of record.