California Wants to Rethink the Down Payment: Prop. 37 Explained
For a lot of California buyers, the dream of owning a home does not necessarily fall apart when they calculate the monthly mortgage payment.
It happens when they look at the cash needed to get through the front door.
A buyer looking at an $800,000 home could be staring at a six figure down payment before they even start thinking about closing costs, moving expenses, reserves, or the inevitable list of things they want to change after getting the keys.
California Proposition 37 is built around the idea that this upfront hurdle deserves a different solution.
On the November ballot, Prop 37 would authorize the California Housing Finance Agency to issue up to $25 billion in revenue bonds and use the proceeds to create a new homebuyer loan program. Qualified buyers could finance up to 17% of the purchase price through the program while contributing at least 3% themselves.
That immediately makes the proposal sound attractive to someone who has good income but has struggled to accumulate a large down payment.
But this is where the details become important. Prop 37 is not proposing to simply give buyers down payment money, the assistance would be financing. The buyer would still have their primary mortgage, while the new program would provide another loan covering a portion of the purchase. Payments from participating homeowners would be used to repay the investors who purchased the revenue bonds.
That creates a very different conversation about affordability. Someone who can comfortably handle the ongoing cost of homeownership but does not have $100,000 or $150,000 sitting in the bank could potentially benefit from reducing the amount of cash required at closing!
Someone already stretching to afford the monthly payment may have a completely different experience.
The down payment may become easier, but the additional financing still has a cost. And that may ultimately be one of the biggest questions surrounding the program.
The state has not simply set aside $25 billion in taxpayer money to fund these loans. CalHFA would sell revenue bonds to investors and use that capital to fund the program. The homeowner payments are intended to cover repayment of those bonds and the cost of administering the program. The Legislative Analyst’s Office says the measure would not create direct state or local government costs.
The unknown however is what those loans will ultimately cost.
Investor demand, bond pricing, interest rates, and how attractive the program looks compared with other financing choices will all affect how useful Prop 37 becomes in practice. The Legislative Analyst specifically identifies investor participation, borrower costs, homebuyer demand, and the effect on new construction as factors that cannot yet be known.
That matters because solving the down payment problem and solving the affordability problem are not always the same thing.
We see versions of that distinction all the time in lending.
One borrower has plenty of income but not enough available cash. Another has significant equity tied up in the home they already own. Someone else has the assets to purchase but runs into conventional income documentation. An investor may have an opportunity that makes sense but cannot wait through a long financing process.
The obstacle changes from transaction to transaction.
Prop 37 is designed for a specific one.
The program would apply to qualifying newly constructed homes and certain properties being sold for the first time after conversion to residential use. Buyers would need to occupy the property, meet California residency and income requirements, and purchase within price limits that vary by area. The official ballot summary says eligible households generally must earn less than twice the area median income.
The focus on new homes is also worth paying attention to.
California already has programs designed to help people with down payments, but increasing the purchasing power of buyers does not automatically increase the number of homes available to buy.
Prop 37 attempts to connect these two sides of the equation by directing the program toward newly created housing rather than existing resale inventory. The idea is that homebuyer assistance could encourage demand for new construction, while at the same time buyers receive another way to finance the purchase. The source material notes that the program generally requires the buyer to be the first occupant of an eligible property.
How much additional housing this will actually produce remains unknown. And that is probably where the most interesting part of Prop 37 sits.
On paper, financing as much as 17% of a home purchase could dramatically change the amount of money some buyers need to save before purchasing. But home financing is never just about the amount of money available. It is about the entire structure.
What is the first mortgage payment?
What does the additional loan cost?
How much cash does the buyer still need?
What happens to the payment when taxes, insurance, HOA dues, and everything else are included?
And most importantly, does the complete transaction make financial sense for that particular buyer?
Those are the questions that ultimately determine whether a financing program creates an opportunity or simply moves the affordability challenge from one part of the transaction to another.
The Pacific Mortgage Bottom Line
Prop 37 highlights something we see often in Private Money lending: the biggest financing obstacle is not always the one you expect.
For some buyers, it is the down payment. For others, it is timing, accessing equity, buying before selling, or fitting traditional underwriting guidelines.
Prop 37 could create another option for eligible buyers purchasing qualifying new homes, but it will not solve every affordability challenge.
That is why we start with the borrower’s goal and the problem standing in the way. Sometimes traditional financing works. Other times, a purchase, refinance, bridge loan, or another Private Money solution may provide the flexibility needed to keep the transaction moving.
If you have a purchase, refinance, bridge loan, or other scenario that does not fit the traditional lending guidelines, send it to us here at Pacific Direct Mortgage! We are happy to review it and let you know what creative financing options may be available.
Husband & Wife Team Phone: 707‑708‑0797 / Office: 1400 N. Dutton Ave #22 Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Ken: CA DRE Broker #01858042 / NMLS #1221130 Ari: CA DRE #01858152 / NMLS #2170867 Ken & Ari are a husband & wife team with combined 3+ decades in real estate and private money industries. They own Pacific Direct Mortgage & Real Estate, specializing in Private Money loans (also known as Hard Money home loans). Having helped thousands of Borrowers & working directly with Brokers, Agents and Lenders to help when needed with fast, flexible, alternative financing for real estate purchases and refinances throughout California. No issues with DTI ratios, credit issues, property condition, difficult to prove income ‑ we want to help
Comments