Who designs these programs? Yeah, what bank in their right mind would sit around for up to 2 years (aka, until the next administration) to close on a loan? That's insanity!
The only orgs getting funding out of these programs are people who already have tons of cash on hand. So only existing real estate barons need apply.
I went through the interview, was accepted as a candidate, and then ... nothing. So I:
* graduated
* started working on the field
* moved 1/2 way across the country
* worked for 2 more years
And, a total of 3+ years later, was called and told that "Congratulations, your name is now at the top of the list, and we have an opening. You're hired!"
I was completely baffled, and told them I had another job... naturally! (this confused person on the other end of the phone?!). And yet after asking around.. this was normal.
Governments do have a different role, being part of the public trust. But still, a very strange world.
The problem here is that they tacked this onto a program designed for rail infrastructure financing instead of creating a new program. The rules and restrictions were designed for rail infrastructure projects and probably make sense in that context, but make no sense when applied to building projects.
And that part might come before, during, or even after securing the property.
People need to think less "buying a house" and more "redeveloping an area".
I've never heard of deals taking longer than a year - how does a multi-year transaction with federal funding even work?
You've just described handling e.g. a dry cleaners or dealing with a single elderly owner.
When you finally shake hands with the elderly owner of the dry cleaners to buy their property, we're talking about another two years after that before they get their money.
This is the problem - too often people from industry don't get consulted OR people from industry with deep wallets who want things done a certain way are the only people who get consulted so that they have free reign to create a moat.
Interns and entry level executive branch employees design these programs, and then some consultants and lobbyists from the stakeholder industries haggle over hourly payments and retainers until they're happy with the text of the order.
Another question you might ask is, who decides to prioritize this program in the first place? How does the WH administration decide to add a program to its agenda?
Not really.
GS-13 and above are fairly competent, but the issue is it's government and you will get some pushback from Political Appointees.
The long tail was probably added in order to prevent headlines of abuse like what happened with the PPP program.
The lossage would be minimal, but the headlines would be a massive headache, so they were most likely forced to add rigorous validation.
> who decides to prioritize this program in the first place? How does the WH administration decide to add a program to its agenda
Recommendations from advisors, staffers, career civil servants, and industry partners.
Out of curiosity, how many "GS-13" employees actually write the technical documentation and legalese themselves, vs. asking their subordinates to produce the initial drafts and then fixing details but missing larger gaps?
You're in cybersecurity/IT which is sadly a massive shitshow in most agencies outside of the DoD and DoE.
All I can say is the grass ain't greener in similarly sized private sector organizations.
Edit: I actually upvoted you. That said, Cyber/IT is treated differently and the GS scheme is different.
Relatively junior Economists, Accountants, and Statisticians won't be given a GS-13 position out the door, but it's more likely for Cyber/IT roles due to the salary constraints.