|
| May 2012 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
But a handful of residents and real estate agents who came out for Tuesday’s public hearing on the matter are concerned that while the drop in the required home footprint might be made with good intentions, it will do more harm than good.
“I support the American dream of home ownership and believe housing should be affordable to anyone who can qualify for a mortgage at price points ranging from affordable to luxury housing,” said Beth Gilliland, president-elect of the Southern Maryland Association of Realtors. “Commissioners, simply making a home smaller will not necessarily make the home affordable.”
[...]
Campbell went on the record expressing his concern that building smaller homes would only accomplish the shrinking of houses, rather than a reduction of price.
He pointed to other programs used in neighboring jurisdictions that assist homebuyers with their down payments and buy up foreclosed homes. This not only helps maintain a tax base that would otherwise be lost to uninhabited homes, it keeps homebuyers in the county.
Next entry: Stimulus, rating yield bond options
Previous entry: Coffey: Mall ‘not violent’