According to USA Today, the Halloween bash at the six-bedroom mansion was a huge success, drawing 1,000 people. It ended only when traffic gridlock got so bad police had to be called.

But the party wasn’t an isolated event. Similar unauthorized parties are taking in place in other cities with vacant homes — evidence of how the problem of empty and foreclosed homes are causing neighborhood blight and other problems. Although some places, like the Phoenix metro area, are showing some signs of progress in dealing with vacancies, there’s been no widespread solution.

As a result, for some neighbors, falling property values from empty homes aren’t the only issue they have to deal with:

In San Diego County, young people have taken over foreclosed houses for late-night rave parties, says Detective Jeff Lauhon of the San Diego County Sheriff’s Office. Lauhon says the culprits were well-organized in some instances: A young couple would get a realtor to give them a tour of a foreclosed house — usually in a rural area on a large property. The woman would distract the realtor while the man surreptitiously left a window open or door ajar. They would then return and invite others for parties that lasted until the wee hours.

At least they’re not pushing dump trucks out of windows.

A party is a temporary way to fill a house, of course. For many cities, the long-term problem of vacant and abandoned foreclosed homes remains a crisis.

As we reported last week, Fannie Mae has a new program to allow owners of foreclosed homes to stay in their properties and rent them back for as long as a year. But filling foreclosed homes with former owners-turned-tenants is also beginning to take hold, on its own, in some of the Sunbelt states that have been hit hardest by the foreclosure crisis, according to Alan Mallach, a visiting scholar with the National Housing Institute and the Brookings Institution.

Mallach told TWI last week that investors increasingly are buying up bank-owned foreclosed homes in the Phoenix area, then renting them back to their former owners. The strategy is to allow the rental for at least five years or so, by which time the investor probably can sell the house again at a profit, while the borrower has a chance to improve his credit. And the best part: Some investors say their plan is to offer the house for sale first to the former owner.

Everybody wins, and if the idea spreads, it may be one way to address the vacancy problem.

Until then, there’s not a lot else out there to clear the backlog of bank-owned homes sitting empty in many neighborhoods.

So in the meantime, unauthorized parties will just have to do.

A foreclosed home in Winchester, Va. (Jay Mallin/ZUMA Press)

Mortgage giant Fannie Mae’s recent announcement that it will give homeowners facing foreclosure the chance to stay in their properties as renters for as long as a year is the latest aggressive move by the government to help troubled borrowers and tenants avoid being evicted. But as past efforts to stem the foreclosure crisis have already shown, even well-intentioned programs haven’t managed to reach significant numbers of people in peril – meaning any new approach faces a tough road ahead.

Image by: Matt Mahurin

The problem has been particularly widespread surrounding a provision in the law, called the Helping Families Save their Homes Act, that allows for borrowers with Section 8 affordable housing vouchers the option to also stay in their residences when their landlord is in foreclosure. Some tenants who call their state or local housing authorities in Massachusetts and Connecticut after a foreclosure eviction notice are mistakenly told they have to move, noted Judith Liben, a senior housing attorney with the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, a nonprofit legal services advocacy group. Better training of housing authority staff would help fix the situation, she said.

“Even with well-intentioned policies, there’s a disconnect between a good idea put into law, and what really happens on the street,” Liben said. “We see that disconnect on the ground, all the time.”

Despite anti-foreclosure initiatives by the government and lenders, the housing crisis has continued to worsen. Foreclosure notices totaled a record high of nearly 938,000 in just the third quarter of this year, according to RealtyTrac, an online foreclosure database. The Center for Responsible Lending predicts a total of 9 million foreclosures by 2012. Vacant and abandoned foreclosed properties are adding to neighborhood blight problems. Renters increasingly have become caught as innocent bystanders, evicted often without notice when their landlord faces foreclosure.

The new federal protections are supposed to address that. But in some cases, tenants in foreclosed homes either can’t reach real estate agents in charge of selling the properties to let them know they want to continue renting, or they get incorrect information from agents and think their only option is to move out immediately, said Shelley White, litigation director at New Haven Legal Assistance in Connecticut. In some instances, law firms send misleading letters that imply a financial incentive to move, known as cash for keys, is a renters’ only option, she said.

“We’re definitely seeing a lot of problems with tenants that just get notes from Realtors that say the bank has foreclosed on your property, and it’s time to get out,” Wright said.

The difficulties in outreach to tenants comes as the government continues expanding options and assistance to borrowers and renters dealing with foreclosure. In addition to the new federal law, the Treasury Department plans soon to rollout its plan encouraging more short sales by offering financial incentives to lenders and borrowers. In a short sale, a homeowner sells his home for less than the amount owed on the mortgage, and lenders forgive the remaining loan balance.

Both Fannie and Freddie Mac earlier this year began allowing qualified tenants in foreclosed homes under their control to sign month-to-month leases. Freddie Mac also started offering former owners of foreclosed homes the month-to-month lease option. Last week, Fannie announced its new policy, which significantly expands on the idea, allowing some owners who didn’t qualify for a loan modification and can’t afford their mortgage  the option of staying on in their homes. The owner would voluntarily turn over the property to Fannie in a “deed for lease” transaction, instead of going through a lengthy foreclosure process. The former owners in exchange would be given the option to rent back their homes for at least a year. Unlike in a short sale, their credit is unlikely to take a hit because of the transaction. And even investors may be eligible, meaning they would turn over their properties to Fannie, but their tenants would have the option to remain.

“This is huge,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, who proposed a similar own to rent idea when the financial crisis first hit two years ago.

Baker would prefer that Fannie’s new policy extend the the rent-back period even further, to five or 10 years. But, overall, Baker said Fannie’s program addresses the problem of growing numbers of vacant properties, and represents a shift to promoting rental policies as a foreclosure solution. “You’re guaranteed a year, and that gives you some stability and a chance to plan ahead,” he said.

He and others also described Fannie’s new program as a big step forward over some efforts currently in place to help renters in foreclosed homes.

Fannie Mae, for example, already gives renters in foreclosed homes the option to continue renting on a month-to-month basis, or to accept a cash for keys offer. According to Fannie’s data, the financial help has been a far more popular option. Since January, it has tallied 3,500 cash for keys agreements, and 300 signed leases. Fannie Mae spokesperson Amy Bonitatibus said the program was set up to offer both choices to renters. It is open to all tenants of Fannie Mae-owned properties, but she had no information on specifically how many tenants had been approached with offers.

The small number of leases signed isn’t really surprising, said Danilo Pelletiere, research director for the National Low Income Housing Coalition. The options to renters were offered post-foreclosure, by which time some tenants may have decided to make other living arrangements. Cash for keys can be a more attractive option than a month to month lease. The new federal tenant protection law also overlapped with Fannie’s program, so some tenants may not have felt a need to sign leases, he said.

Pelletiere and other advocates said they have much higher expectations for Fannie’s new approach for former owners. A deed for lease transaction can happen far more quickly than a foreclosure, and having a longer-term lease will be more attractive to many people. Fannie also has hired a national property management company to handle the new program, while its existing rental initiative for tenants uses local real estate agents and property managers.

“Because of the way it’s designed, it should do a much better job,” Pelletiere said. “That makes it much more likely that we’ll see a national response. It provides a way for Fannie to be proactive and to get to the property earlier. And it costs less than getting someone out of a home and foreclosing on them.”

Alan Mallach, a senior fellow at the National Housing Institute and the Brookings Institution, agreed. “What’s interesting will be to look at how many people this new policy affects,” Mallach said. “I think it will be significant.”

Pelletiere said he also found some encouragement in early results from Freddie Mac’s program earlier this year to rent back properties to former owners of foreclosed homes on a month by month basis. According to Freddie Mac’s figures, almost 12,000 units entered its portfolio of foreclosed homes between April and October. In 70 percent of cases, a borrower is working on a mortgage loan modification, leasing the home back, or accepting cash for keys. In another 27 percent of cases, the property was vacant by the time Freddie Mac took it over. In three to four percent of cases, an owner or renter faced eviction. Of those occupants who signed leases, two-thirds were owner occupants and one-third were tenants. Spokesman Brad German said he had no further breakdown of the numbers.

The long-held belief has been that owners would decline to become renters again, so having more owners than renters sign rental leases is an encouraging sign for Fannie’s new program, Pelletiere said.

Still, he and others noted the government wouldn’t be prompted to move toward a more aggressive rental policy if a greater number of loan modifications were successful. A recent report by the Congressional Oversight Panel for the government’s taxpayer-funded bailout program criticized the progress being made under the administration’s Making Home Affordable program, saying that in a best case scenario it would prevent fewer than half of expected foreclosures.

As foreclosure notices pile up, troubled tenants and borrowers don’t always understand they might be eligible for help, or they don’t know who to contact to apply for programs, or they just give up and leave upon a foreclosure – even in cases where they have new federal laws and programs intended to avoid evictions. To Liben, the Massachusetts housing attorney, one constant of the housing crisis has been that some people “get lost in the shuffle.” She’s waiting to see if that will finally change.

Here’s more about the study from EurekAlert!, a science and technology news site.

Unemployment rates topping 10 percent are the highest in 26 years. Families are working more hours and taking on more part-time jobs. At the same time, unemployment benefits are running out for many families. Faced with the worst recession since the Great Depression, many U.S. families have no choice but to draw on inadequate savings to pay for essential household expenses. Many of these families are at risk of losing their housing. They may also cut back on food and healthcare to make ends meet.

The report, from Brandeis’ Institute on Assets and Social Policy, tried to measure families’ asset holding to their ability to pay for essential household expenses and also to invest in future opportunities for mobility, such as a home purchase, business start-up, retraining, or education. The report also showed that less than half of all families have sufficient savings to address essential expenses and invest in opportunities for mobility when faced with a job loss. And things get worse from there:

Moreover, many more households of color lack the financial assets to meet their expenses during periods of unemployment. Sixty-six percent of African American and Latino households are not asset secure, and only 20 percent of households of color have financial assets to invest in opportunities for mobility. While most American families lack sufficient wealth to invest in education, housing, business ventures, or training for better jobs, the dramatic distance that marks families of color is a reflection of the profound, deep, and systematic racial wealth gap.

Instead of moving to create jobs, Congress took action recently to extend the first-time homebuyer tax credit and to give homebuilders a big tax break.  Hopefully a glimpse of the harsh realities experienced by unemployed workers and their families will entice lawmakers to pass legislation that will produce many more much-needed jobs, instead of propping up home prices and paying off interest groups.

Did you know that since 2003, when the subprime market really took off, April has been Financial Literacy Month? Now you do. But in an age where financial expertise seems so discredited what qualifies someone to be financially literate?

It’s a fair question. Unfortunately, the answers aren’t reassuring. First, as Konczal notes, “financial literacy” as a course of study doesn’t exactly exist in the economics field. There’s no incentive to get published on it; there’s little academic research as a result. What fills the gap? As we pointed out, subprime lenders align themselves with mainstream financial literacy groups and fund their efforts as a way to distract from the controversies surrounding their products. Konczal explains the problem goes even further, with unqualified “experts” dispensing their alleged personal finance wisdom.

There’s little academic backing, there’s no money for journals, research grants, conferences, the development of theory and expertise that is deployable into policy. That leaves the field wide open to be funded by credit card companies, subprime lenders, and others with a vested interest in certain modes of thought becoming the norm. And for expertise to be filled by people who come from motivational speaking backgrounds, and theory to end up as a mess of common-sense adages and low-level morality plays. The theme of Financial Literacy Month for 2008 was “Financial Responsibility Begins with Me”; why didn’t they call it “caveat emptor”?

One of the biggest hurdles facing the creation of legitimate and useful financial literacy programs will continue to be funding for non-biased, professional counselors.  It’s not a great time to push the government to provide more money to the nation’s Cooperative Extension System — but that national educational network remains a valuable source of credible personal finance research. And as we said, some corporations are beginning to incorporate financial literacy into their human resources responsibilities, given the problem of employees burdened with distracting financial problems.

In the end, that may really be what it takes to get untainted financial literacy education going — the overwhelming debt crisis facing American consumers. Maybe the government and the private sector will come to realize that partnering with credit card companies and subprime lenders isn’t going to get the job done. As Calculated Risk has repeatedly asked, why aren’t consumers being educated on the perils of not paying their credit card bills off in full every month? Probably because, in the absence of untainted financial literacy advice, a company like Visa is backing a high-profile financial literacy initiative. It seems unlikely advising people to pay off their credit cards is the focus of that effort.

As credit tightens, so will the need for legitimate financial literacy education. And as consumer debt becomes something harder to ignore, maybe the unholy alliance of creditors with a stake in the game and financial literacy education programs often aimed at younger borrowers in particular, will finally come to an end.

Detroit has 80,000 abandoned lots and buildings, according to the city’s planning department. Old housing projects, homes, strip malls and even high-rise buildings sit empty across much of the city. Motown has more vacant office, retail and industrial space than nearly every other big city in the country.

Like many of Detroit’s abandoned buildings, though, it’s anything but deserted. Rather, it’s a hive of activity, buzzing with scavengers, vandals, late-night revelers, arsonists, photographers and urban explorers who brave the crumbling buildings’ many hazards and create a good number of their own. The complex remains unguarded.

“Mayhem. That’s what they should call the place,” says John, a 36-year-old telephone-line repairman who spends his spare time exploring Detroit’s legendary industrial ruins. “If you decide you want to push a dump truck out of a window, this is the place to do it.”

There’s more to this. The pranksters’ playground of empty and abandoned properties represents a deep and lasting betrayal of the needs of urban America.  Some cities in the Rustbelt, hit first by the abandonment of their inner cores and then utterly devastated by foreclosures, bear scars from which they are unlikely to recover and that few seem to see. Years after the financial crisis ends, I wonder if we’ll look back at this as a time when we stood by and let some of the country’s once-great communities simply fall into disrepair and die.

In Washington, Congress ceded to the lobbying efforts of powerful interests like the National Association of Homebuilders, and passed an extension of a homebuyer’s tax credit that costs more than it delivers and puts money into the pockets of people who don’t need it. There are no lobbying groups for people who live in neighborhoods with foreclosures that even banks have abandoned because they aren’t worth the expense of taking back.

However, there are some bright spots in the overall dark landscape. As TWI’s sister site, The Michigan Messenger, pointed out last week, urban gardening has taken hold in parts of Detroit, which now boasts more than 700 urban farms within its city limits. The idea behind some of those farms is to present a healthy alternative to the liquor stores, gas stations, and convenience stores where residents often turn for high-cost groceries and fast food.

Like urban gardening, the best solutions to the abandonment crisis will come from the bottom up. But those efforts need government support to take hold and expand. In order to take off, any possible solution requires a sense of urgency among policymakers about the huge problems facing cities like Detroit, Cleveland, Chicago — and even the outer exurbs in the boom markets of California and Arizona, where foreclosures have caused property values to sink and have left communities stuck in a downward spiral.

But there’s  been no big national push for possible solutions like land banks, which would allow local communities to seize and reuse vacant land and buildings. There’s been no national summit to talk about the tragedy of declining neighborhoods due to foreclosures. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner apparently picks up the phone and chats with his Wall Street friends several times a day. Hey, Secretary Geithner — How about making a call to a homeowner surrounded by foreclosed homes? Or maybe taking a stroll down one of those blocks in Detroit where every single home is owned by a real estate speculator? In America’s abandoned neighborhoods, they’ve been waiting to hear from you, or from anyone in Washington, for a long time. And they’re still waiting.

But now the swine flu has Wal-Mart under scrutiny for a very different reason: Accusations that the retailer is leaving employees infected with swine flu little choice but to come to work, due to its punitive sick leave policies.

Citing a report by the National Labor Committee, the Institute for Southern Studies’ argues on its blog Facing South that Wal-Mart is essentially contributing to the spread of swine flu by making it financially prohibitive for employees to miss work when they fall ill.

Employees of the Arkansas-based retail giant — even its food handlers — feel they have no choice but to work when they’re sick. That’s because the company gives workers demerits and deducts pay for staying home when they’re sick or caring for sick children.

It gets worse:

The situation is particularly difficult for Wal-Mart workers who are single parents. The NLC reports on an instance in which an employee got a call from her four-year-old’s preschool telling her to pick up the child, who had a fever of 103 degrees F. Despite the fact that the employee had already worked for four hours that day, she got a demerit point for leaving and lost her wages for the rest of the day.

The report says: “Parents have no choice but to load their children up with Motrin and Dimetap to mask their symptoms so they can go to school.”

Which, of course, leads to a vicious circle of other children at school becoming sick, and spreading it in their families. Not to mention the misery of a sick child facing a full day of school.

What’s particularly interesting is that Wal-Mart includes on its Website some information about swine flu, including frequently asked questions. Here’s the answer to “What should I do if I get sick?”

Stay away from others as much as possible to keep from making others sick. Staying at home means that you should not leave your home except to seek medical care. This means avoiding normal activities, including work, school, travel, shopping, social events and public gatherings.

Unless you work at Wal-Mart. Then, you’d better make it in for your shift if you don’t want your pay docked or possibly lose your job. From Facing South:

Wal-Mart has a demerit system that punishes workers who cannot come to work due to illness. Employees who miss a day due to sickness receive a one-point demerit and lose eight hours of wages.

Employees with more than three absences a six-month period face discipline, and a fifth absence — even for a sick day — will result in what the company calls “active coaching” by management.

A sixth absence leads to what Wal-Mart calls “Decision Day,” when a worker can be either terminated or put on a year-long trial period during which time he or she can be fired for any infraction and cannot be promoted.

The swine flu sometimes can cause people to miss an entire week or more of work. At Wal-Mart, that could get you fired.

Somehow, I don’t think that’s what the Center for Disease Control was hoping for this flu season, as it tries to contain a life-threatening virus. Wal-Mart’s labor policies have long been contentious, but this one could actually create a public safety issue. If these allegations are true, it may be time for public health officials to step in somehow, perhaps with fines for the retailer for keeping flu-stricken employees on the job. And let’s not just pick on Wal-Mart; it’s very possible that other low-wage retailers and business are doing the same thing. Maybe the best option in the absence of any government action is for customers to walk away. Is a bargain really worth it if employees are forced to work while sick with the flu — and potentially help to spread an unusually dangerous virus?

On television it’s hard to miss the wildly popular band of slackers singing ruefully from a shabby apartment or while waiting tables in pirate regalia. The ruined credit that led to their financial misfortune might have been sparkling if only they’d tracked their status on freecreditreport.com.

The Federal Trade Commission is not amused. It has long believed that the company that owns freecreditreport.com is deliberately diverting people from a government-mandated site where consumers can get free credit reports by law, and using the reports as a lure for a $14.95 monthly service that alerts subscribers to important changes in their credit status.

The government even has put together a spoof video of those popular ads, with singers letting consumers know they can check their credit reports for free. But beyond the ads, the story explains, is the $1 billion credit monitoring industry, which allows consumers to check for real-time changes to their reports. With the exception of identity theft victims, few consumers have a need for that kind of monitoring. And if they do, they can check their credit themselves, without charge, several times a year.

The problem is that some consumers sign up unwittingly for these monitoring services, thinking they’re getting a one-time free credit score check, and finding themselves instead locked into a monthly fee as high as $30. And such services are peddled not just by those freecreditreport.com singers, but by the big three credit bureaus and major credit card companies.

The fact that consumers are signing up — and paying — for services they can get for free from the government tells you a lot about the state of financial literacy in this country. Our story mentioned car title dealers, payday lenders and other fringe banking services that cater mostly to low- and moderate-income consumers. But the Times story makes clear financial literacy knows no income boundaries, with consumers being tripped up by mainstream lenders as well. Magic Johnson isn’t the only celebrity endorsing predatory businesses, like Rent-A-Center. Former New York Times Sunday Business columnist Ben Stein got fired after doing commercials for a shady credit reporting company.

Good luck to the government trying to educate consumers about this. It won’t be easy. When I called up the New York Times piece to write this post, all kinds of ads for free credit scores and credit monitoring companies popped up on my screen. And as we mentioned, financial literacy efforts in this country often don’t come just from the government or other unbiased sources, but from corporations and lenders with a stake in the game.

Visa, for example, announced recently its goal of helping 20 million people worldwide with financial literacy skills, attracting some positive publicity for the effort. Wonder if the advice will include paying off your credit card balance in its entirety each month, or, better yet, avoiding the plastic altogether.

Flickr: Stallio

As a credit squeeze continues, calls to beef up financial literacy among America’s consumers are taking on a new urgency.

In Massachusetts, Democratic Senate candidate Stephen Pagliuca is pushing for a national financial literacy campaign, saying it would help avoid a repeat of the financial system collapse last fall. In Miami, which recently introduced citywide financial literacy programs, a top official called financial literacy “the new civil-rights problem of our century.” In the blogosphere, basketball superstar Magic Johnson is under fire for doing national commercials for Rent-A-Center, a leading firm in the costly rent to own business, and Jackson Hewitt, which offers high-rate tax refund anticipation loans. Critics contend Johnson is endorsing products that exploit a lack of financial sophistication among some low-income consumers.

Image by: Matt Mahurin

But despite that obvious need, most of the nation’s financial literacy efforts aren’t exactly up to the job. As credit expanded in past years, corporations threw money at financial literacy programs even as they continued marketing higher-rate credit cards and loans. Consumer credit and debt counseling agencies expanded into a $7 billion industry that now includes everything from legitimate organizations that help a consumer fix his finances to flim-flam outfits that charge high frees and leave a borrower in worse shape than before. Subprime lenders created “consumer advocacy” organizations and offered financial literacy advice.

The situation has become so troubled that some credit experts no longer believe many financial literacy efforts are even effective. Between complicated credit card agreements that trip up even law students to payday lenders providing financial education, they say, most of the attempts to educate consumers on their finances are either hopelessly tainted or simply don’t make a difference.

“If you’re a consumer in financial distress, there’s really no trustworthy guide for pointing you to the right solution – almost everyone has a stake in the game,” said Adam Levitin, a Georgetown University law school professor who specializes in bankruptcy and credit. “The problem goes deeper, though, as all sorts of consumer credit counseling organizations are funded indirectly by various credit industry players. I’m frankly more comfortable with openly for-profit debt settlement agencies (they negotiate debt reductions in exchange for taking a percentage for themselves) than with the faux not-for-profit players.”

Irene Leech, former president of the Consumer Federation of America and a Virginia Tech University professor who focuses on consumer issues, agreed.

“All education offered by the businesses that sell the product they’re educating on is subject to bias,” she said. “These companies don’t dare hit the points that need to be hit hard enough – or they’d lose business – so their efforts are at best disingenuous and at worst, fraud.”

As TWI has reported, the nation’s leading financial literacy effort, the JumpStart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy, includes as one of its corporate partners CompuCredit, a subprime lender that offers high-rate credit cards and payday loans. Last year, CompuCredit reached a $114 million settlement with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Federal Trade Commission, which had charged CompuCredit and two partner banks with deceiving hundreds of thousands of customers by failing to properly disclose upfront fees and credit limits on their cards.

In addition, JumpStart’s Southeast Regional Director, William Cheeks, a paid consultant, also does consulting work for CompuCredit.

JumpStart Executive Director Laura Levine told TWI that no one had previously brought these issues to JumpStart’s attention, and that the organization’s staff would investigate them. Last week, Levine said the organization plans to introduce a conflict of interest policy for staff and for consultants, in the wake of the story. The coalition’s governance committee also “is going to look further into CompuCredit in particular,” she said, and “we’re going to continue to deal with issues regarding the suitability of partners on a case by case basis.”

Like CompuCredit, other subprime lenders also aligned themselves in recent years with financial literacy efforts, or moved to portray themselves as good corporate citizens, by donating to local minority groups or sponsoring events in minority communities. In a campaign that particularly irked Leech, payday lenders ran an advertising campaign on Washington metro system, touting payday loans as a sound financial alternative.

Other high-rate lenders also are using similar tactics.
Ray Forgue, a retired University of Kentucky professor who taught personal finance, and who has written personal finance books and a textbook, now lives in South Carolina. Car title lenders “are everywhere,” he said, featuring advertisements that show consumers being allegedly financially savvy by taking out car title loans to pay for dental care. Car title lenders make loans using a borrower’s car as collateral, with interest rates that can approach 400 percent. Borrowers who can’t keep up with the high payments lose their cars, and then, in many cases, their jobs as well.

These kinds of tactics present a huge challenge for financial literacy efforts, Forgue said. Any financial literacy program has to both battle the saturation of subprime products that have made their way into the mainstream, and help consumers understand newer and more complex financial issues, from insurance to retirement planning.

“The products are far more complicated, both on the consumer credit and the investment side,” Forgue said. “Financial literacy definitely is much more important than it ever has been before.”

Leech, for her part, said the problem with financial literacy in recent years has been that funding for unbiased, professional counselors has been replaced by corporate dollars. One fix might be for the government to reinvest in the nation’s Cooperative Extension System, a national educational network supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture that provides consumers with experts and research on many topics, including financial literacy. The cooperative system was created by Congress in 1914, and uses the resources of land grant colleges and universities to offer its non-formal, non-credit programs to the public. The system has offices in every state and a website with financial research and information, from budgeting during lean times to an “ask an expert” feature, with questions like how much allowance a child should get at a certain age.

Leech also supports the America Saves campaign, a nationwide effort run by the Consumer Federation of America to encourage low and moderate income households to change their financial behaviors, build up savings, and pay down debt. The campaign, the nation’s largest savings initiative, also sponsors an annual “America Saves Week” that encourages people to review their finances and improve their savings habits.

And the human resources departments of corporations and businesses are increasingly getting involved in financial literacy efforts, Leech added, since employees with financial troubles can be distracted or forced to miss work due to legal battles over debts.

But any financial literacy attempt faces an uphill fight. The attorneys general of 40 states recently asked the Federal Trade Commission to tighten regulation of companies offering debt relief services to consumers, saying the firms require customers to pay thousands of dollars in upfront fees, and then fail to renegotiate payments with creditors. The FTC will hear testimony this week on proposals for reform, as the battle over consumers and their money decisions continues, and the credit squeeze tightens further.

Just three years ago, Marin county residents were busy raising money for a legal fight to stop Habitat for Humanity from building four homes affordable to families making under $56,000/year, saying it would “blight” their exclusive neighborhood of million dollar plus houses. (The project is still being debated.)

But now they are being welcomed with open arms in another part of the county as they renovate one of the foreclosed homes that even Marin has acquired a passel of. Habitat bought the house, which needs extensive rehab, for $215,00. It doesn’t sound affordable exactly to those of us in more affordable parts of the country, but in a county where the median home price is $800,000, I guess it qualifies.

Nothing like a wave of foreclosures to change those “Not In My Backyard” attitudes. This, by the way, is what affordable housing looks like in Marin.

As the Marin case shows, high-priced homes are increasingly going into foreclosure. Don’t be surprised to see Habitat next in a place like Palm Beach, Fla. Or maybe the group will take on even more foreclosures in Marin. The one constant about this crisis is that no region escapes its reach, even neighborhoods that once thought they were safe. For some once-exclusive cul-de-sac communities, it may be time to drop the NIMBY attitude,  roll up your sleeves,  and help out with the Habitat renovation.

The Wayne County auction of some 9,000 repossessed properties last week resulted in more than 80 percent of them failing to draw a single bid. And that’s even with the minimum bid starting at just $500.

The fact that Rust Belt cities such as Detroit and Cleveland are plagued with foreclosed properties isn’t a new development. But what happened at that Detroit auction gives a glimpse into how acute the problem is. WalletPop explains:

The auction didn’t go smoothly, however. Out-of-town speculators cherry-picked prime properties in areas such as the Boston-Edison district, while locals who showed up too late for registration weren’t permitted to take part.

That’s the scandal. One of the reasons distressed communities have begun fighting for tools such as land banks — public enterprises that allow a community to quickly acquire abandoned and foreclosed properties, so they can be cleaned up and put to use – is to prevent speculators from playing games with foreclosed properties, while local officials watch helplessly. But as we’ve reported, getting a land bank together can be a lengthy and complicated process. Communities like Flint, Mich., are spearheading the shrinking cities movement, which tries to deal with the problem of foreclosed properties by cordoning off abandoned areas of the city and letting the land return to nature. It can be a great idea for some communities, but to achieve it, local officials first need that land bank or some other way to gain control of abandoned and foreclosed homes and land.

Otherwise, you can end up with a situation like the Detroit auction, where out-of-town speculators with money and experience can out-bid any local community groups or investors who might want to actually rebuild neighborhoods, rather than just  play real estate games.

As Virginia Tech urban planning expert Joseph Schilling told TWI last spring, ““We do a pretty good job in this country of recycling cans and plastic bottles. But we do an awful job of recycling and reusing vacant properties.”

Until our national housing policy turns more aggressively toward encouraging and allowing more local control of foreclosed properties — and to providing some financial support for that effort — expect to see more sad situations like that Detroit auction. We have some of the answers to this, in innovative policies like land banks. Why aren’t we moving with urgency to use them?