San Diego Foreclosure Measure Impact Unclear

On November 11, the Voice of San Diego published an article titled Impact of Alvarez’s Signature Foreclosure Measure Unclear.

Impact of Alvarez’s Signature Foreclosure Measure Unclear

Councilman David Alvarez celebrated a legislative victory last November after months of pushing for a registry to force banks to take responsibility for foreclosed homes before they become run down and affect neighbors’ property values.

Alvarez and his supporters have repeatedly touted the measure, known as the Property Value Protection Ordinance, as he campaigns for mayor but nearly a year after it was approved, it’s still hard to tell whether it’s achieving some of its core goals.

The nearly year-old city law created a registry of foreclosed homes and contact information for banks to ensure the city can hold those who don’t maintain their properties responsible. Participants pay $76 annually to register and up to $5,000 in fees if they fail to do so.

The city has logged roughly 1,700 residential properties in its foreclosure database and collected more than $190,000 in associated fees. But a city code enforcement manager charged with overseeing the program couldn’t detail how it’s help the city crack down on problem properties, or even say whether it’s helped code officers reach the banks responsible for those homes more quickly than they would have without the measure.

“It gives us some leads on tracking people down that may be responsible for the property that we may not have had before but that would be the extent of how it’s helping us,” said acting Code Enforcement Coordinator Mike Richmond.

The limited resources applied to the program may be partly to blame. Nearly a year after program was implemented, the city has hired only one of the three workers a former code enforcement chief said would be necessary to run the program and code workers have only inspected a handful of properties in the registry.

Alvarez and Clare Crawford, president of the Center on Policy Initiatives, a left-leaning think tank that promoted the measure, argue its impact can’t be fully measured yet, or perhaps ever.

They say just requiring banks involved in the foreclosure process to pay a registration fee and share their contact information provides an incentive to take responsibility.

“If (banks) have registered, they know we’re going to hold them accountable,” Alvarez said. “It was a measure to let people know we know who you are and if you don’t maintain your property, (the city) is going to come after them.”

City staffers are set to provide a more extensive report on the program’s caseload, impact and budget before the city’s Land Use and Housing Committee in coming months. Alvarez said he looks forward to that review.

Basics of the Ordinance

Alvarez faced significant opposition from former Mayor Jerry Sanders, fellow City Council members and Realtors in his nearly two-year quest to create the foreclosure registry. It was eventually approved in a 5-3 City Council vote long after the height of the foreclosure crisis.

Neighboring cities, including Chula Vista, approved programs to combat foreclosure-related blight years ago.

Alvarez made compromises in an effort to ensure the measure’s central goal survived.

The final version of the ordinance required lenders to register with the city within 10 days of a notice of default, which is filed after a homeowner falls behind on mortgage payments.

Earlier drafts implied city code officers would regularly inspect those properties to stave off blight, a charge the city’s former code enforcement chief said would require the city to hire as many as 44 new workers.

The measure approved by the City Council simply empowered the city to inspect and monitor residences in the foreclosure database.  At the time, the city projected it needed three new employees to work on the foreclosure registry.

Alvarez and city staffers projected the $76 registration fee and $100-a-day fines on lenders that fail to send proper documentation to the city within 10 days would cover the cost of the program.

Here’s an early look at whether that pledge, along with other goals of the ordinance, have been accomplished.

Goal 1: Create a registry of foreclosed properties and hire three people to oversee it.

In February, the city implemented the ordinance and began adding residences in the foreclosure process to a database.

The registry includes records of fees, contact information for lenders assigned to the properties and basic information about the residence.

City leaders only set aside cash for one new employee for the program.

In May, the city hired an administrative staffer to manage the database, monitor notices of default and other foreclosure-related filings in the city and send out registry notices.

A senior code enforcement worker was also initially assigned to help oversee the program but she’ll soon focus less on those duties, Richmond said.

He said the code enforcement division plans to request money next year to hire a full-time zoning investigator to monitor properties in the foreclosure registry and an administrative assistant who would spend about half of his or her time working on the database.

Goal 2: Ensure banks can’t escape responsibility for blighted properties.

Throughout the foreclosure crisis, the homes around foreclosed properties suffered too. Neighbors’ property values took a hit as weeds sprouted around foreclosed properties and uninvited visitors pounced. Meanwhile, cities sometimes struggled to determine who owned the property and to force banks to take responsibility.

Before the city created its foreclosure registry earlier this year, Richmond said code officers relied on several databases and outside services to track down property owners and lenders.

Richmond said the foreclosure registry has provided another resource for code enforcement officers but couldn’t detail any examples or say how often it’s helped.

Goal 3: Crack down on problem properties.

The ordinance opened the door for the city to penalize financial institutions for foreclosed properties that fall into blight but that hasn’t happened.

Increased enforcement would require more staffing, Richmond said.

Soon after the ordinance was first implemented in February, a code enforcement officer checked more than a dozen properties listed in the database but found no violations that required penalties. Code officers haven’t done random checks of such properties since.

It’s also not clear what fraction of other properties in the database might be considered truly problematic.

Richmond could only single out eight abandoned properties residents or police had complained about that also appear in the city’s foreclosure database. This is a tiny fraction of the more than 1,600 homes listed in a registry created to ensure accountability for problem properties.

This may be because the city requires lenders to sign onto the registry after they’ve filed a notice of default, an early step in the foreclosure process. After this happens, homeowners may catch up on their bills or come to new agreements with their lender and keep their houses.

Goal 4: The ordinance should pay for itself.

Moments before the City Council voted on Alvarez’s hard-fought measure, he repeatedly tried to drive home one point: It wouldn’t cost the city any money.

And it hasn’t.

As of mid-October, the city had collected $126,464 in registry fees and another $65,000 in penalties, according to code enforcement records.

That totals $191,464, nearly $108,000 more than the salary and benefits the program’s single administrative staffer is set to receive this year.

The city is also seeking another $890,000 in penalties that have yet to be paid.

Richmond said the registry fees are funneled directly to the city’s operating fund while the penalty fees go specifically toward code-enforcement efforts. The city has yet to use the latter cash for work associated with the Property Value Protection Ordinance.

To view the online article, please click here.

 

About Safeguard 
Safeguard Properties is the largest mortgage field services company in the U.S. Founded in 1990 by Robert Klein and based in Valley View, Ohio, the company inspects and maintains defaulted and foreclosed properties for mortgage servicers, lenders,  and other financial institutions. Safeguard employs approximately 1,700 people, in addition to a network of thousands of contractors nationally. Website: www.safeguardproperties.com.

x

CEO

Alan Jaffa

Alan Jaffa is the Chief Executive Officer for Safeguard Properties, steering the company as the mortgage field services industry leader. He also serves on the board of advisors for SCG Partners, a middle-market private equity fund focused on diversifying and expanding Safeguard Properties’ business model into complimentary markets.

Alan joined Safeguard in 1995, learning the business from the ground up. He was promoted to Chief Operating Officer in 2002, and was named CEO in May 2010. His hands-on experience has given him unique insights as a leader to innovate, improve and strengthen Safeguard’s processes to assure that the company adheres to the highest standards of quality and customer service.

Under Alan’s leadership, Safeguard has grown significantly with strategies that have included new and expanded services, technology investments that deliver higher quality and greater efficiency to clients, and strategic acquisitions. He takes a team approach to process improvement, involving staff at all levels of the organization to address issues, brainstorm solutions, and identify new and better ways to serve clients.

In 2008, Alan was recognized by Crain’s Cleveland Business in its annual “40-Under-40” profile of young leaders. He also was named a NEO Ernst & Young Entrepreneur Of The Year® Award finalist in 2013.

x

Esq., General Counsel and EVP

Linda Erkkila

Linda Erkkila is the General Counsel and Executive Vice President for Safeguard Properties, with oversight of legal, human resources, training, and compliance. Linda’s broad scope of oversight covers regulatory issues that impact Safeguard’s operations, risk mitigation, strategic planning, human resources and training initiatives, compliance, insurance, litigation and claims management, and counsel related to mergers, acquisition and joint ventures.

Linda assures that Safeguard’s strategic initiatives align with its resources, leverage opportunities across the company, and contemplate compliance mandates. She has practiced law for 25 years and her experience, both as outside and in-house counsel, covers a wide range of corporate matters, including regulatory disclosure, corporate governance compliance, risk assessment, compensation and benefits, litigation management, and mergers and acquisitions.

Linda earned her JD at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. She holds a degree in economics from Miami University and an MBA. Linda was previously named as both a “Woman of Influence” by HousingWire and as a “Leading Lady” by MReport.

x

COO

Michael Greenbaum

Michael Greenbaum is the Chief Operating Officer of Safeguard Properties, where he has played a pivotal role since joining the company in July 2010. Initially brought on as Vice President of REO, Mike’s exceptional leadership and strategic vision quickly propelled him to Vice President of Operations in 2013, and ultimately to COO in 2015. Over his 14-year tenure at Safeguard, Mike has been instrumental in driving change and fostering innovation within the Property Preservation sector, consistently delivering excellence and becoming a trusted partner to clients and investors.

A distinguished graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, Mike earned a degree in Quantitative Economics. Following his graduation, he served in the U.S. Army’s Ordnance Branch, where he specialized in supply chain management. Before his tenure at Safeguard, Mike honed his expertise by managing global supply chains for 13 years, leveraging his military and civilian experience to lead with precision and efficacy.

x

CFO

Joe Iafigliola

Joe Iafigliola is the Chief Financial Officer for Safeguard Properties. Joe is responsible for the Control, Quality Assurance, Business Development, Marketing, Accounting, and Information Security departments. At the core of his responsibilities is the drive to ensure that Safeguard’s focus remains rooted in Customer Service = Resolution. Through his executive leadership role, he actively supports SGPNOW.com, an on-demand service geared towards real estate and property management professionals as well as individual home owners in need of inspection and property preservation services. Joe is also an integral force behind Compliance Connections, a branch of Safeguard Properties that allows code enforcement professionals to report violations at properties that can then be addressed by the Safeguard vendor network. Compliance Connections also researches and shares vacant property ordinance information with Safeguard clients.

Joe has an MBA from The Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve University, is a Certified Management Accountant (CMA), and holds a bachelor’s degree from The Ohio State University’s Honors Accounting program.

x

Business Development

Carrie Tackett

Business Development Safeguard Properties