This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Land banks are a powerful tool to address vacant properties in rural communities, and West Virginia passed land bank enabling legislation in 2014. To account for these limitations, we’re seeing land banks step in as the property developer. The bill ran in 2014 and passed that same year.
In response, Democrats in California and Massachusetts, Republicans in Utah and Montana, and city governments across the country have enacted legislation designed to address the barriers that restrict new housing development. For example, in the 2014 planning cycle, the statewide target for housing growth was one million units.
In response to that growing criticism plus how much has changed in markets, legislation, and regulation during the 90-plus years of the FHLBanks’ existence, its regulator – the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) – announced in 2022 that it would undertake a review of the entire System.
percent) in 2014, after having been purposefully increased by the FHFA and the two GSEs in prior years. percent range since 2014, rather than being materially lower or higher, does not seem to be well understood in the industry or among policy specialists. percent in 2014 and then stayed in the 0.44 percent to 0.49 percent to 0.49
The changes then became the subject of hearings and legislation in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives to reverse the changes. The prior risk-based adjustment to the GSEs’ G-fees had been set about a decade ago based on historic loss statistics at that time, with some revisions implemented in 2014.
An exit from conservatorship can occur through legislation or administrative means. ” As Congress had created F&F, the Obama administration looked to Congress to enact legislation to do just that. go into run off and be liquidated in some fashion) and replaced by “something else.”
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 40,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content