4 ms·
They weren't "giving houses away for $1". They were requiring people to assume the liabilities related to code and zoning compliance, along with a remediation
by logfromblammo 8y ago
They weren't "giving houses away for $1". They were requiring people to assume the liabilities related to code and zoning compliance, along with a remediation schedule, in order to take ownership. And those expenses couldn't be paid by a mortgage loan; the city had to issue its own loans.
Typical monthly payment was $300/month, and they had a low default rate, so it was still a decent deal. But it wasn't just $1.
House flipping is a career for some people. Every last one of them look at probable resale value after remodel in comparison to expenses required to reach marketable condition. No flipper would do $100k of work on a house when the neighboring properties simply don't sell at any price, and tend to remain vacant after foreclosure.
And that's the "location" factor talking. I don't know if it's the first, second, or third "location" in the list, but if a city culture or city government sucks, people and businesses don't want to move there.
I have seen it in every city I have lived in. The local government takes ever-increasing amounts of your money, and digs entirely separate holes to throw that money into, rather than any of the naturally-forming potholes on every street that isn't part of some councilman's route to city hall. The governance that worked with steadily increasing population doesn't work with stagnant or decreasing population.
At some point, a declining city needs to de-annex some of its former territory and prune its own deadwood. And it needs to fire its municipal employees that are not absolutely essential to keeping the city infrastructure running. Some shut down their city police and fire departments, reverting to sheriff's deputies and volunteer firefighters, who may even operate out of the same buildings. But the problem is the politics. Admitting the city is insolvent and promising to cut some services to save the rest doesn't get you re-elected when your opponent simply denies the problem exists and lies about the city's condition to make people feel better about still living in it.
- dev_dull 8y ago> And it needs to fire its municipal employees that are not absolutely essential to keeping the city infrastructure running. There is nothing more challenging than firing incompetent city employees. And if they can lodge a discrimination claim against you (regardless of whether it has ANY merit) then just forget about it. Promote them up and out. What a cesspool.