On behalf of over 24,000 members, the Massachusetts Association of Realtors® (MAR) hereby express our strong opposition to S.1839 An Act relative to home energy efficiency. As outlined in greater detail below, this bill would disrupt the real estate marketplace by complicating and delaying home sales, negatively impacting those who do not have the resources to invest in energy efficiency, and would replace a successful program with a state mandate that would punish many homeowners in the Commonwealth. Protecting our environment and promoting energy efficiency is a priority of Realtors® in Massachusetts. Our Association supports policies and programs aimed at encouraging homeowners to make energy efficiency improvements to their home. We …show more content…
The program is working, audits are happening, and legislation is not needed to force home sellers to conduct an audit. Instead of requiring more audits, the Commonwealth should focus on ways to incentivize those who have already had an audit to invest in the energy efficiency of their home. • Private property rights and Constitutional issues: The concept of a government agent inspecting and then labeling or scoring people’s homes is an infringement on private property rights. The energy audit provisions would require homeowners to allow third-party entry into their homes for the purpose of conducting the audit. Because it would require third-party entry, the home energy audit mandate raises serious privacy concerns under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It is noteworthy that in Massachusetts, mandatory inspection of a home at the time of sale or transfer arises in only two contexts: (1) inspection of a property with a septic system for compliance with Title 5; and (2) inspection for compliance with the smoke detector and carbon monoxide alarm requirements of G.L. c. 148, § 26F. In each of these cases, the inspection is justified by public health and safety interests of that dwelling. By contrast, the inspection of a home for energy efficiency measures would be conducted in the hopes of achieving a governmental goal, not protecting the health or safety of the occupants of that particular dwelling. • Stigmatizing property: Massachusetts has
We all expect to have privacy in our homes, but just how much privacy do we actually have? In Oregon, DLK was suspected to be growing marijuana in his home, so the police used thermal imaging, without a warrant, to provide evidence to arrest him. DLK claimed that his right to protection from search and seizure, provided by the fourth amendment, was violated. The Supreme Court then had to decide if the thermal imaging scan infringed DLK’s fourth amendment rights. While he may have been growing marijuana in his home, the U.S. Government violated his fourth amendment rights when they used thermal imaging, without a warrant, to gather evidence.
Our methods of energy generation and usage are another valuable resource that we must use responsibly if we are to protect it. According to the Florida Energy System Consortium,
Habitat for Humanity is a nonprofit organization dedicate to building homes for low-income individuals. This organization requires that potential homeowners assist in the building of their home or others to reduce the financing cost of homeownership. This paper focuses on the percentage of property tax revenue, two arguments in favor, and two arguments property tax breaks for Habitat of Humanity homeowner, and case resolution.
Firstly, the Katz two-prong precedent should be applied. Although Kyllo’s home passes the first test, demonstrating an expectation of privacy from the public naked eye in his activities, no measures were taken to conceal the waste heat emanating from his house. Continuing, the Katz case addresses the plaintiff’s protection from the uninvited ear, but not the “intruding eye.” However, the agents merely conducted observations of the exterior of the building, not even
The real estate industry is thriving with approximately sixty-eight percent of all Americans being homeowners. With low interest rates, 1st time home buyer down payment assistance programs, and government funded educational opportunities (i.e. the Home Ownership Center of Greater Cincinnati), the real estate and mortgage lending industries will continue to flourish. However, there are some unethical lending practices that are threatening the housing industry as a whole.
The real estate industry is thriving with approximately sixty-eight percent of all Americans being homeowners. With low interest rates, 1st time home buyer down payment assistance programs, and government funded educational opportunities (i.e. the Home Ownership Center of Greater Cincinnati), the real estate and mortgage lending industries will continue to flourish. However, there are some unethical lending practices that are threatening the housing industry as a whole.
What constitutes as legal search and seizure has been a long debated topic in American history. The varying complexities of different modern day situations compete with the views of the Founding Fathers as expressed in the Constitution, often leading to fierce court battles over what violates individual rights. Take DLK, an Oregon citizen suspected of growing marijuana in his home. Federal agents used a thermal imager to scan DLK’s residence from outside, which revealed heat typical of special lights used for indoor marijuana growth. This information allowed agents to obtain a search warrant, discover marijuana plants, and arrest DLK. However, the legality of the thermal scan has been much debated due to the nature of its usage. Federal agents’ thermal imaging of DLK’s residence did not violate DLK’s Fourth Amendment rights, as
In the world of which The Constitution and its Amendments must be followed, there has been great debate on whether a dog that is trained to sniff out certain smells such as narcotics, is considered a search prohibited by the Fourth Amendment, but what could be said if the place a dog sniff is done, is the outside of a home. A home, is a place that a person believes they have the most protection because that is where a person resides, but the question of whether the outside of a home holds the same protection can be debated back and forth. It is of great importance though, in the case of future discussion, to know if the outside of a home is protected under the fourth amendment from a dog sniff or whether it isn’t. To answer the question at
Aside from setting appropriations deadlines, this week the House passed the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015 (H.R. 3700) a proactive bill to extend affordable housing to more low-income families. The bipartisan measure received nearly unanimous support with 427 votes in favor also included an amendment by Representatives David Price (D-NC) and Robert Aderholt (R-AL) to modernize the HOPWA formula by counting people living with HIV rather than cumulative AIDS cases.
A bill, SB 35, written by Senator Scott Wiener, streamlines the home building action by removing roadblocks to development. Instead of putting roadblocks in the way, we should be offering incentives for housing development. “The explosive costs of housing have spread like wildfire around the state,” said Senator Scott Wiener. This is not a problem with elite housing along the coast. This is a problem that covers huge areas of the state. It’s damaging the economy. It also damages the environment, as people are forced into longer commutes.
The Annapolis city government has aimed to reduce emissions by 75% by the year 2025 as well as achieve carbon neutrality by the year 2050 (Savidge 2010). In order to achieve these goals, the city government has committed to reducing energy usage by 10% in public facilities by 2017 and 15% by 2020 (Savidge 2010). The city government also plans to achieve 25% of their energy from renewable sources as well as providing greener and more energy efficient upgrades to public facilities and city transportation (Savidge 2010). The Annapolis community has aimed to reduce emissions by 50% by the year 2025 as well as achieve carbon neutrality by the year 2050 (Savidge 2010). The community has been and will continue to actively encourage locals to purchase green and renewable energy, use alternative forms of transportation, increase recycling and reduce trash production, and to preform energy efficiency upgrades (Savidge 2010). Such efficiency upgrades could take place in the form of financing home energy improvements, energy efficient mortgages, energy smart schools, or zero interest loans for energy conservation and “green energy projects (Roseland 2012).” Mark Roseland published a paper on sustainability “solutions for citizens and their governments” that outlines the benefits that simple energy efficient upgrades can achieve (Roseland 2012). He states examples where residents can save over $1000 each year on oil, gas, and electric bills while reducing their emissions through local
The government is justified of collecting information of individuals that have probable cause, evidence or reasonable suspicions about the working living conditions. The Courts argued that that individuals are protected under the fourth amendment were they should have expectation of privacy, were a warrant is needed to collect information of individuals. This is an example of this week’s legal case Marshall v. Barlow’ Inc., since the plaintiff was protected by his fourth amendment restricting the ability of the OSHA inspector to collect information were the individual is expected to have intimacy (back shop) without any reasonable suspicions. However, there are places where regulated businesses are expectations of the warrant requirement since
This legislation an act of parliament came into act in 2008. The legislation creates a legally binding commitment to reduce the UK’s green house gas emissions drastically by 80% by 2050, and by 34% by 2020. These reductions are contrary to the 1990 emissions. Currently less than 200,000 properties are built every year. In order to rebuild the inefficient homes it would take approximately 120 years, which is not viable in order to reduce carbon emissions by 2050. Therefore the existing stock would need to be retrofitted to improve its energy
Changing the way energy in buildings is monitored, controlled and consumed can bring down CO2 emissions and reduce costs (Faucheux & Nicolaï, 2011) .
Humans today are using much more electricity than we need to in our houses and this is impacting our world more then we realise. Although electricity is a huge advantage to humans it has the complete opposite effects on our environment. By using more electricity, we are using more of the earth’s resources and if we keep going down this road then we are going to run out. The solution for this mass overuse of energy is to build houses which are more energy efficient. Features like LED lightbulbs, insulating and even positioning your house in the correct position for natural airflow instead of using air conditioning are all ways we can help improve this problem.