That would just devalue the surrounding property even more. This is why "we should just do X" is almost always a bad idea.
Why do you think that's the case? I'm sure it would make the entire city seem like a riskier investment at first, but it seems like in the medium term it would help address the situation described in the article.
Does your car drive worse if no one will buy it?
I'm not saying it doesn't suck to overpay for something, but you can't expect too much pity when you lose money speculating.
Or you think the best way to deal with people getting scammed, is to make sure everyone gets scammed, to avoid being unfair to the initial victims of the scam. For example if Billy put $200 in a Ponzi scheme we should tax everyone else $200 to make it fair.