Disclaimer: Both my parents work in the mortgage underwriting business, one of them forcing BoA/Chase/Wells to take back th loans they made during the boom times.
EDIT: I'm a sport, here's a citation: http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2013/09/wsj-fha-cuts-waiti...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732398060457903...
This could become a textbook case of government power abuse backfiring at the people the politicians claim to be "helping"
There is a better description of what this city did: Theft
As much as I hate it, "Wickard vs Fillburn", and "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission", "Gonzales v. Raich", and lastly "Kelo v. City of New London" ARE the laws of the land.
If the investment classes are going to be leveraging laws against homeowner to take property at 'current market prices'; how is it wrong for cities to force investor classes to do the same?
Change the laws, but don't decry the victims of fraud and systemic false market inflation turning the current laws against those who perpetuated the pump and dump scheme on them in the first place.
I think it will cost some financing issues/property costs, but then it will lead to the rise of a Community Trust bank or Credit Union. These are things that truly change communities.
Neither are exactly a bad thing.
But keep in mind that the world's best-regarded borrower is the German federal government, which has defaulted twice in the past century. Past returns do not predict future performance, as the prospectuses say.
Yes it will cost more for 10 years until they can re-finance; but when the city offers a margin over market, actual people bond buyers will jump for the chance to make a % over market.