Who should be the new leader of the Department of Housing and Urban Development?  Will it be someone chosen because of their close ties to housing?  Will it be a political friend of the new President?  Will it be a person with some wherewithall in the field of manufactured housing?

The last situation would be a real stroke of luck.  Housing and Urban Development is a department with strong ties to the political traditions of America’s largest cities.  That makes sense, of course.

Jesse Jackson, Jr. is one figure who might be tapped to lead HUD.  Then again, Jackson might decide that he would prefer to run for the vacant Senate seat in Illinois.

What if the person was someone apart from the urban tradition, but simultaenously drawn to looking at a broader perspective surrounding housing and housing finance?

One possibility in this vein would be a leader from the Manufactured Housing Institute.  Would Ken Cashlin or Joe Stegmayer be an appropriate choice? Or, it could be someone chosen on the friendly suggestion of MHI.  But, will MHI be in the room when the decision is made to pick the leadership that will govern its business for the next few years?

The MHI appears to have prepared for the new tone in politics.  In 2008, slightly more than half of their giving went to Democratic candidates, according to CampaignMoney.com.  That is a big difference from 2004, when only about 35 percent went to Dems.  The Dems that they supported were logical choices — leaders on finance (Brad Miller, Paul Kanjorski, Barney Frank), heads of important committees (John Dingell, David Price, Charles Rangel) or from rural states (Max Baucus).

Still, it does not seem likely that they will be there.  They didn’t give any money to Obama, or for that matter, to McCain.  Maybe they aren’t worried about chasing leadership posts.

One of Western North Carolina’s leading providers of housing counseling may see its federal HUD funding cut, on technical grounds.

On October 15, 2008 the US Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) declined the 2008-09 grant application from OnTrack Financial Education & Counseling.  Based out of Asheville, On Track had been hoping for a $135,000 grant.  This grant would have gone to provide services for foreclosure prevention counseling, reverse mortgage counseling for elderly homeowners, and homebuyer education for WNC.

OnTrack has been a HUD approved housing counseling agency since 1979.  OnTrack points out that technical difficulties caused OnTrack’s application to not successfully upload to HUD’s grant website on the July 9th deadline. For over four months, they have worked to make amends.  Their application was denied, nonetheless.

This is frustrating.  Foreclosures are a problem undermining our economy.  Counseling works to ameliorate bad situations and prevent new problems before they arise in the first place.  Counseling is cost-efficient.

HUD has announced its 2008 allocations for housing counseling.  This is important.  Housing counseling serves as a first responder system for predatory lending.  It can steer families into making decisions about loans that they can afford.  It can help families when they are in trouble.  They can act as an intermediary between a lender and a borrower, helping to find a repayment agreement when a loan is delinquent.

There are a lot of reasons why so many housing counselors are empathetic.  Also, there are a lot of reasons why so many are exhausted.  Its a hard job.

HUD allocates a great deal of the funding that goes to housing counseling agencies.

Turns out that funding is dropping 23 percent in North Carolina this year.  Whereas about 1.23 million went to the state last year, this year only $988,000 is coming for HUD counseling.

It’s a shame.  It’s hardly believable.   True, housing counseling is increasing year-over-year for the country as a whole.

The reasons for this are complicated.  HUD counseling dollars are very difficult to spend.  While an agency gets points for having experience in HUD’s allocation criteria, they lose points for having received funding from HUD in the past.

Nonetheless, its a matter of scale.  We are quibbling about $50 million across the country for housing counseling, after Wall Street just got $700 billion.  This is crumbs for predatory lending prevention and for loan modifications of delinquent loans.  These activities that are ultimately very cost-effective.  Aside from that, they keep people in their homes.

With time, it feels like Steve Preston’s appointment to lead HUD is making more sense.  Yes, he comes from a background outside of housing.  Yes, he only has a portion of a year to turn around an agency that has been run into the ground by its previous leadership.  Yes, there are good people available (more…)