Is GMAC negotiating? Press conference 11am on Thursday at Rosemary's House

Wednesday night-- A proposal from GMAC to keep Rosemary Williams in her home appears to be on the table.  According to an email and phone call from Minneapolis City Councilwoman Elizabeth Glidden early this afternoon, a proposal has been pitched between Tom Moreno, CEO of GMAC ResCap, and Carolyn Olson, President of GMHC.  Glidden and others have informed the Minneapolis Police that an offer has been made.

After a somewhat tense night last night, tonight's mood is cautiously optimistic as the occupation at 3138 Clinton continues.  Thursday morning, all supporters are asked to come to an 11am press conference at which more details about the negotiations will be announced.  The words of GMAC and Elizabeth Glidden have been hollow before, but what impact has the continued holding of space on Clinton Avenue had?  We may find out Thursday.

MPR: Williams Turns Down $5,000 Offer "[It would be] kind of like selling my soul to the devil" | Linda Norenberg Vows to Occupy Robbinsdale Home

UPDATE 6:30pm Wednesday - GMAC may  be negotiating.  Press conference tomorrow at 11am--all are encouraged to attend for an update! Tonight, stop by to spend time at the house until 10pm.

UPDATE 5am Wednesday - Mostly calm night - few cop drive-bys.  "You're the coolest party in the neighborhood," said one.  Many folks still at house, spirits good but vigilant!

Previous coverage below

4pm Tuesday--Dozens of supporters are still occupying Rosemary Williams' home at 3138 Clinton Avenue, even after a police raid appeared imminent earlier today.  This morning, Williams' lawyer received an offer from GMAC: pay $5,000, or we'll send in the cops at noon.  Williams refused to budge.  So too, apparently, did the mortgage companies and city officials.  A cancelled rally at the mayor's office led to a presence of 75 people at its height at the house, and the cops have so far decided to stay away, save a few drive-bys.  Major media including CNN were at the house earlier.

Instead of going to city hall, supporters inundated mayor RT Rybak with phone calls urging him to halt any possible police intervention, and also phoned the MPD criminal division.  Inquiries to Senator Amy Klobuchar's office yielded little if any impact.  Around 2pm on Clinton Avenue, two hours after the deadline, the Sisters Camelot mobile food shelf stopped by with a much-needed boost of free food; other donations have been arriving from neighbors throughout the day.  Rosemary, the home's resident of 55 years, is staying put - wondering whether the authorities are willing to risk the publicity of dragging this anchor of the Central Neighborhood out her own door.

Activists are considering the likelihood that a police raid may occur overnight - making a presence of supporters this evening and during the night extra important.  To be updated with breaking news from Rosemary's, get on TCIMC's twitter feed by texting follow tcimc to 40404, or stop by 3138 Clinton Avenue and ask to be placed on a call list.

Do you have photos or other information from the Clinton Ave. occupation?  Please post them in the comments to this article!

Photo from TC Daily Planet | MPR | Fight Back News

 

Comments

Viva La Resistencia!

We will not stand by and let them take Rosemary's home from her.  The community is here, and ready to stand up for human dignity in the face of greedy heartless banks.

La lucha sigue!

Rosemary's house

Give me a break.  The woman refinanced TWICE into a adjustable rate morgage?  I could see if a lost job or mountain of medical bills caused the foreclosure but apparently thats not the case here.  Sounds like she dug her own hole to me.  No one that refinanced into an ARM should get a break!  That's just stupidity.   Read the details of a loan before you sign!   

At one point she did lose her

At one point she did lose her job... Not that that has anything to do with whether a PERSON has a right to a place to live. And it is important for Rosemary to stay in this particular house because it is in the community in which she has lived for over five decades. If there is someone you should be mad at, it's the banks. The banks got bailed out, but banks don't need to eat, breathe, or seek shelter. Everything is backwards, the banks should be getting a swift eviction from society. It's good to see people stand up and say enough is enough- we're not taking it anymore!

Who's refusing her "right" to

Who's refusing her "right" to a place to live (which no one has by the way)? She can rent like the rest of us that can't afford to buy our own houses and pay all of the rest of our bills. But, have sympathy for her because she has other bills to pay. Why don't you have sympathy for me, because I pay my bills and yet I can't buy a house. I have a right to buy a house and then not have to pay my bills, don't I?

Have you ever thought about

Have you ever thought about why people refinance?  And why people refinance into dubious financial instruments?  It's usually because--wait for it--they need the money for some perfectly legitimate reason like medical bills, or the medical bills of a family member, etc. Or house repairs!

And why are people in such straits?  Because real wages fall or stagnate, healthcare gets out of reach, education gets costly--all those things that ought be be available to everyone who needs them get more and more expensive and folks end up with loans or mortgages that aren't so great because they need the money.

 

Back story please!

Can we once please get the full back story?  What did she use the money she got by refinancing for?  What equity did she have in the house at the time?  Did she read and understand the loan terms?  Is she employed now?  What monthly payment could she now afford...

There are so many questions which Rosemary and her supporters seem to refuse to answer.   Please answer them now.  I would very much like to have sympathy for her, but the constant refusal to answer these basic questions makes it very hard.

Would you publicly lay out all your spending habits?

I don't know the details of Rosemary Williams' personal finances and quite frankly it is none of my business.  What is clear to me is that Rosemary does not live a life of extravegence, she clearly lives a basic lifestyle in a home she has been in for decades.  Rosemary lost her job and fell on hard financial times, it is something that can happen to all but the most wealthy citizens and people should not be thrown out on the streets because the bankers are unwilling to work out reasonable payment offers.  To expect a woman who has lost her job to either come up with over $2,000 a month to stay in a home she has lived in for over twenty years or be thrown onto the streets is immoral in any situation, and for you to be demanding to go through Rosemary's personal finances so you can figure out any way she may have been able to avoid her situation shows that you have an extremely cold heart.  People need shelter more than bankers need profit and I applaud Rosemary and all of her supporters for having the courage to stand up for basic human dignity.

>>I don't know the details of

>>I don't know the details of Rosemary Williams' personal finances and quite frankly it is none of my business

And I wish it was none of my business.  But this has been made, by design, such a public display that it has become all our business.  It becam all our business when it started draining public resources- such as the frauduanet court case which Rosemary's supporters started, but the decision of which they refused to abide by.

>>To expect a woman who has lost her job

What job?  The only job I can find listed for her was the Isis Center for which she was the director.  Please tell me what job she lost.

>>What is clear to me is that Rosemary does not live a life of extravegence

This may be clear to you- perhaps you know her. But to those who have been reading about this, it is not clear at all.  That is why everybody in the various forums (e.g. strib) have so little sympathy.  Would you agree that the case would be different if she spent the 12K on plasma televisions?  The fact that folks keep asking how this happened, and nobody involved will say, makes us assume that she used the money in some extravegant way.  If this is not the case- just explain where it went.  But until then it will look like she spent a few years not working, going out for coffee, living in a big house without boarders, and generally slacking.  This may well be false.  But this is exactly how the situation looks- based upon comments such as yours that is is nobodies business where the money went.

>be thrown onto the streets

She is not going to be "thrown in the streets".  She can just rent another place. Or buy a cheaper house.  Or if she does not have money for either of these- then how does she propose to pay on the current house?

>>unwilling to work out reasonable payment offers

This is what I am trying to figure out!  What would you and the supporters say is reasonable?  Based on what?

>>demanding to go through Rosemary's personal finances so you can figure out any way she may have been able to avoid her situation

If more poeple spent time figuring out ways to avoid similar situations, then we all would be better off.  If Rosemary had spent time figuring out ways to avoid her situation she obviously would be better off.  

>> you have an extremely cold heart

I will tell you this sadely- this case has made my heart colder.  The fact that folks keep asking to learn more about the situation, and are constantly rebuffed, makes me much less sympathetic.  And frankly, I am sick of folks on both ends of the economic spectrum who are looking for a bailout.  I called my congresspeople to tell them to vote agains the bankers bailout.  And I called the Mayor's office today to urge him to have the police put closure on this case.  All those who lived beyond their means during the past decadent decade are seeing the consequences of their actions.  It is unpleasant- but it is the path they chose.  And as soon as we let this real estate bubble unwind, we will be in a much better situation.  Houses will be back to reasonable prices, and folks such as Rosemary will have leared that you can not take equity out of your house and expect that somebody else will pay the price.

>>more than bankers need profit

Do you not know that the bonds which will get shorted when folks like Rosemary do not pay are publically owned?  When folks like Rosemary stiff their lenders it is not some stereotyplical "fat cat banker" who suffers.  It is retirees and those living on pensions who who take the hit.

"And I wish it was none of my

"And I wish it was none of my business.  But this has been made, by design, such a public display that it has become all our business." 

No it is not your business, your business is your own personal finances not those of a person of very modest means.  We all have the right to privacy including Rosemary, just because she has taken a public stand does not mean she has to turn over her most personal information to armchair pundits to scrutinize every spending decision she has made.  She is not a wealthy person but she has been able to afford her house until recently, it is not like she just moved in last month and refused to pay her mortgage from the beginning, she fell on hard times and was not able to pay.

"What job?  The only job I can find listed for her was the Isis Center for which she was the director.  Please tell me what job she lost."

I know she lost her job because virtually every media report has stated and personal testimony I have heard have stated this explicitly.  Maybe someone can tell you exactly what job that is but I have never felt it was my business to ask because to me it does not matter what job she had previously.  The fact is that she used to be able to make her payments but eventually she fell behind as many people do when they hit hard times.

"unwilling to work out reasonable payment offers

This is what I am trying to figure out!  What would you and the supporters say is reasonable?  Based on what?"

Rosemary's house payments shot from $1,200 a month up to $2,200, when she lost her job this became impossible for her to pay.  Rosemary is not claiming she should be able to live in her house without paying but she wants the banks to come to the table and work out a plan that she can afford, certainly they should be able to do this for such a long time home owner who has made payments for decades.

 

"I will tell you this sadely- this case has made my heart colder.  The fact that folks keep asking to learn more about the situation, and are constantly rebuffed, makes me much less sympathetic. "
 

Yes your heart is cold, and there is good reason that you are rebuffed because her finances are not your business.  I don't know of a single person who hands over all their personal financial information to the media for them to comb over, to do so would be an enormous risk to her financial security particularly when she already is not in a good situation.

"Do you not know that the bonds which will get shorted when folks like Rosemary do not pay are publically owned?  When folks like Rosemary stiff their lenders it is not some stereotyplical "fat cat banker" who suffers.  It is retirees and those living on pensions who who take the hit."

And you end by making the case for protest against these banks.  The bankers destroy people's lives, walk away with the profit and leave ordinary citizens with the consequences.  This is exactly why we need people like Rosemary to stand up and resist their greed.

Re: Would you publicly lay out all your spending habits?

Bjorn- I missed your subject until I posted.

Yes- I would love to lay out my spending habits!  I live so frugely that when I cut my hand gardening (for food) I gave myself stitches because I did not have health care.  I wipe my ass with paper napkins I salvaged from restaurants.  I have no TV and spent my evening tonight splitting wood so that I can be warm this winter.  I eat food retrieved from dumpsters.  I do not drive a car- relying on a used bike and the bus to save money (and carbon emmisions).  I save my bathwater to water plants.  I first bought a house in 97 in a neighborhood where folks regularly fought dogs and where the siding had bullet holes.  I spent years busting my butt to make it a home, and to improve my neighborood.  I worked multiple jobs and took in renters to get the money to pay it off.  When it finally got paid off- I sure as heck did not refinance!

 

How is your financial situation relevant to Rosemary's?

You have faced challenges and so has Rosemary but your challenges were not the same challenges that she faced so just because you made your payments does not mean you can expect that she can keep making her payments on time after losing a job.

You know, I thought about not

You know, I thought about not replying to this, since there's not much common ground between folks who think foreclosures are awful and tragic and folks who think that the foreclosed-upon must have done something to deserve it.

But then I started wondering--what exactly is so wonderful about being so "frugel" that you don't have health care and do your own stitches?  I have a big scar from when I was little and we couldn't afford to go to the ER, and I remember how scary it was to be told to lie very very still while we waited for the bleeding to stop.  

Maybe it's just the sell-out labor activist in me talking, but I don't think there's anything wrong with organizing society so that people can afford to buy their own toilet paper.  Or go to the doctor, for pete's sake.

 

 

well said

well said

Why are Homeowners Not Being Helped ?

 

(why are communites (cities) allowing themselves to be held hostage by Lenders ?)
 
Why Are Homeowners Not Being Helped?
Los Angeles Times - Opinion
August 11, 2009
One of the mysteries of the recession is why mortgage lenders haven't tried harder to avert foreclosures. Because property values have plummeted in once-sizzling markets, lenders that repossess a house can lose half or more of the original loan's value. That leaves plenty of room to modify the terms of a loan and still obtain a better return on the lender's investment. Yet the number of loans going into foreclosure continues to mount, and the number of homes repossessed and sold this year is almost as high as it was a year ago.
The latest evidence arrived last week, when the Treasury Department reported that a new federal program for troubled borrowers had benefited only 9% of the eligible homeowners. The program cuts monthly payments to match the borrowers' ability to repay, an approach that's far less likely to result in new defaults than the payment plans typically offered by lenders. Yet some of the biggest mortgage servicing companies -- most notably Bank of America and Wells Fargo -- were slow to implement the new program, even though it offers cash to help borrowers stay current on their payments.
The banks said the Treasury Department overlooked their other efforts to help borrowers who were defaulting. Bank of America, for example, claimed to have made 150,000 loan modifications beyond the 28,000 tentative deals counted by the feds. Still, the total amounts to less than one-fourth of the bank's borrowers who qualify for help. Many of them simply can't be saved, such as the subprime borrowers who took on too much debt or the prime borrowers who have lost their jobs. But even excluding those groups, it's hard to believe that Bank of America is doing enough loan modifications to maximize its returns. And the more homes it repossesses unnecessarily, the more it damages the value of neighboring properties -- sending a ripple of misery through the broader economy.
Granted, plenty of would-be home buyers have no interest in slowing the pace of foreclosures. There's also the risk of creating perverse incentives when risk-takers are shielded from the consequences of their bad bets. The issue here, however, is whether the companies servicing mortgages are doing everything they can to protect the interests of those who own the loans. The numbers say they aren't. Regulators should find out why, which means obtaining and disclosing more information from servicing companies about the mortgages that aren't modified. The taxpayers who've lent the banks billions of dollars to rescue them from default deserve to know. But so do the investors and lenders whose interests the loan servicing companies are supposed to be protecting

 

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <p> <span> <div> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <img> <map> <area> <hr> <br> <br /> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <table> <tr> <td> <em> <b> <u> <i> <strong> <font> <del> <ins> <sub> <sup> <quote> <blockquote> <pre> <address> <code> <cite> <embed> <object> <param> <strike> <caption>

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
* one = five
Solve this math question and enter the solution with digits. E.g. for "two plus four = ?" enter "6".