Return-Path: <judyp@tpda.com>
Received: from rly-mg07.mx.aol.com (rly-mg07.mail.aol.com [172.20.83.113]) by
	air-mg08.mail.aol.com (v121.4) with ESMTP id
	MAILINMG081-a2047595b0d282; Fri, 07 Dec 2007 09:39:46 -0500
Received: from host548.ipowerweb.com (host548.ipowerweb.com [72.22.69.239]) by
	rly-mg07.mx.aol.com (v121.4) with ESMTP id
	MAILRELAYINMG072-a2047595b0d282; Fri, 07 Dec 2007 09:39:09 -0500
Received: (qmail 20525 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2007 14:39:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.47?) (71.254.96.215)
	by host548.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 7 Dec 2007 14:39:29 -0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a0623094ec37ef82c6dd4@[192.168.1.47]>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 09:38:13 -0500
To: bsingo@verizon.net, lucky7li@verizon.net, Mlongreene2@aol.com,
	Sscheurman@aol.com, Townoflongisland@verizon.net
From: JudyP <judyp@tpda.com>
Subject: some thoughts on our last meeting
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="============_-1015084148==_ma============"
X-AOL-IP: 72.22.69.239
X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: listenair ; SPF_helo : n
X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: listenair ; SPF_822_from : n
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


--============_-1015084148==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello All:

I have been reviewing the notes from our last meeting and have some 
additional thoughts about some of the decisions we made:

First of all I want to explain how I am trying to make these 
decisions. In my opinion there is one deciding factor - did the 
person have a choice in their decision or not. I spoke about this in 
the "number of persons in a household" discussion. Having children is 
a choice some make and others do not. I do not think people should be 
rewarded simply for having made the choice to have children. But 
that's another discussion.


Item #4 in the Selection Criteria: Not a Property Owner.

The more I think about this the more I am convinced that this program 
should be for first-time home owners. Anyone who has owned property 
in the past has made a choice of whether to sell it or not, for a 
profit or not. Anyone who owns property now can make the choice to 
sell it and put that money toward something else. Even the most 
modest summer homes on the island are worth a lot because of the land 
value. My guess is that most of these summer homes which have been in 
families for generations are fully paid for. The current owners could 
choose to use that value for a home-equity loan to buy another piece 
of undeveloped land to build on in the future.

For most Americans net worth consists primarily of the value their 
homes. They can borrow against it to help pay unexpected bills, 
educate their children, improve their lives. Those who have never 
owned property have had nothing to bargain with. First home ownership 
has the power to change people's lives for the better. In most cases 
it is the beginning of a lifetime of home ownership.

I agree that we want this program to benefit those who are already 
here. But the number of people and families on Long Island right now 
who have never owned property is pretty high relative to the size of 
the community. Many have been hanging in for years waiting for the 
right opportunity. This should be their opportunity. In the future, 
if and when we exhaust the pool of first-time buyers, we can revisit 
this issue.
In the meantime, keep in mind that as people move from their current 
rentals into these homes they will be leaving year-round rental 
vacancies for others.

(I know that the YRHC did a lot of initial digging into what might 
work for Long Island before they settled on this particular program. 
I am interested in knowing what other information they may have 
gathered in their initial research for helping people find financing 
or other affordable options for home ownership. Right now the YRHC is 
fully engaged in this particular program but I would hope in the 
future they will be able to assist those who do not qualify for this 
program by being a resource for other options.)

Item #7 in the Point System

I am still uneasy about assigning points for the number of people. 
Larger households have an advantage already in that they can 
accumulate more points for "community service" than a smaller 
household or single person. Plus, by default, a family with children 
would have an advantage over a childless couple or single. A pregnant 
couple might have an advantage in the "immediacy of need" if their 
current rental is too small or otherwise unfit for children. Again, 
having children was their choice (remember that for some, not having 
children is not a choice.)

OTHER:

There seems to be some concern that we might not end up with enough 
ways to earn points. I disagree. Points for points sake is well, 
pointless. We should be prioritizing candidates by those who have the 
most commitment, the most need and the most to offer this island. If 
we can determine that with 4 questions we don't need 8. If not, we 
should make sure that whatever other factors we measure will enhance 
our ability to make an informed decision, not just add work with no 
value.

I look forward to our next meeting,
Judy
-- 
Judy Paolini
TPDA
207-871-1813 office
207-329-6153 cell
judyp@tpda.com

--============_-1015084148==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 } --></style><title>some thoughts on our last
meeting</title></head><body>
<div>Hello All:</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I have been reviewing the notes from our last meeting and have
some additional thoughts about some of the decisions we made:</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>First of all I want to explain how I am trying to make these
decisions. In my opinion there is one deciding factor - did the person
have a<i> choice</i> in their decision or not. I spoke about this in
the "number of persons in a household" discussion. Having
children is a choice some make and others do not. I do not think
people should be rewarded simply for having made the choice to have
children. But that's another discussion.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><b>Item #4 in the Selection Criteria: Not a Property
Owner.</b></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>The more I think about this the more I am convinced that this
program should be for first-time home owners. Anyone who has owned
property in the past has made a choice of whether to sell it or not,
for a profit or not. Anyone who owns property now can make the choice
to sell it and put that money toward something else. Even the most
modest summer homes on the island are worth a lot because of the land
value. My guess is that most of these summer homes which have been in
families for generations are fully paid for. The current owners could
choose to use that value for a home-equity loan to buy another piece
of undeveloped land to build on in the future.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>For most Americans net worth consists primarily of the value
their homes. They can borrow against it to help pay unexpected bills,
educate their children, improve their lives. Those who have never
owned property have had nothing to bargain with. First home ownership
has the power to change people's lives for the better. In most cases
it is the beginning of a lifetime of home ownership.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I agree that we want this program to benefit those who are
already here. But the number of people and families on Long Island
right now who have never owned property is pretty high relative to the
size of the community. Many have been hanging in for years waiting for
the right opportunity. This should be their opportunity. In the
future, if and when we exhaust the pool of first-time buyers, we can
revisit this issue.</div>
<div>In the meantime, keep in mind that as people move from their
current rentals into these homes they will be leaving year-round
rental vacancies for others.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>(I know that the YRHC did a lot of initial digging into what
might work for Long Island before they settled on this particular
program. I am interested in knowing what other information they may
have gathered in their initial research for helping people find
financing or other affordable options for home ownership. Right now
the YRHC is fully engaged in this particular program but I would hope
in the future they will be able to assist those who do not qualify for
this program by being a resource for other options.)</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><b>Item #7 in the Point System</b></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I am still uneasy about assigning points for the number of
people. Larger households have an advantage already in that they can
accumulate more points for "community service" than a
smaller household or single person. Plus, by default, a family with
children would have an advantage over a childless couple or single. A
pregnant couple might have an advantage in the "immediacy of
need" if their current rental is too small or otherwise unfit for
children. Again, having children was their choice (remember that for
some,<i> not</i> having children is<i> not</i> a choice.)</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><b>OTHER:</b></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>There seems to be some concern that we might not end up with
enough ways to earn points. I disagree. Points for points sake is
well, pointless. We should be prioritizing candidates by those who
have the most commitment, the most need and the most to offer this
island. If we can determine that with 4 questions we don't need 8. If
not, we should make sure that whatever other factors we measure will
enhance our ability to make an informed decision, not just add work
with no value.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I look forward to our next meeting,</div>
<div>Judy</div>
<x-sigsep><pre>-- 
</pre></x-sigsep>
<div>Judy Paolini<br>
TPDA<br>
207-871-1813 office<br>
207-329-6153 cell<br>
judyp@tpda.com</div>
</body>
</html>

--============_-1015084148==_ma============--