Letter from California
Home Economics
Can an entrepreneur’s audacious plan fix the mortgage mess?
by Tad Friend February 4, 2013
Subscribers can read
the full version of this story by logging into our digital archive. You can also subscribe now or find out about other ways to read The New Yorker digitally.
LETTER FROM CALIFORNIA about Steven Gluckstern’s solution for
the foreclosure crisis. At sixty-one, Steven Gluckstern has extensive experience
handicapping risk propositions on Wall Street. This past fall, Gluckstern, the
chairman of a San Francisco-based group called Mortgage Resolution Partners, was
in the midst of a tour of Southern California. In between hasty meals, he raced
his rented Mercedes to meetings with mayors and activists and real-estate agents
and developers, trying to interest them in his company’s sole product: a plan
for cities battered by the foreclosure crisis to keep their citizens in their
homes. It’s a tool so ingenious that Wall Street treats it as the gravest threat
to civilization since the breakfast burrito. Even as America’s home prices have
risen for six of the past seven months, twenty per cent of homeowners remain
“underwater,” owing more in principal than the house is worth. It’s a national
problem that’s concentrated in a few locales, most notably California. Mentions
Salinas councilwoman Jyl Lutes. In places like Salinas, a large part of the
problem is not the loans that are held by banks. It’s the ones that were pooled
in “private-label securitizations.” Under Gluckstern’s plan, a city would use
its powers of eminent domain to seize a homeowner’s mortgage in court, pay off
the bondholders, then arrange a new mortgage for the homeowner at a price much
closer to what the home is actually worth. M.R.P. started its campaign in San
Bernardino County. In June, the county and the cities of Fontana and Ontario
established a “joint powers authority” to examine M.R.P.’s plan. The foes of
eminent domain rose up almost instantly and assailed the plan. A coalition of
twenty-six financial-service and real-estate groups sent a letter threatening
lawsuits. The opposition often invoked what’s known as the “moral-hazard
argument”: if you reward people for risky behavior they’ll just do it more. By
the time Gluckstern visited the San Bernardino area, last fall, he was a marked
man. When Gluckstern dropped by county C.E.O. Greg Devereaux’s office, Devereaux
ruefully acknowledged that the opposition had gummed up M.R.P.’s plans. Without
quite conceding in San Bernardino, Gluckstern began stealthier campaigns, in
Michigan, Maryland, and southern Florida. He hopes to convince the opposition
that his campaign will continue.
Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/02/04/130204fa_fact_friend#ixzz2JpHT9oQj
No comments:
Post a Comment