Christopher Pitt says closing-table deed practice is holding back affordable housing

Christopher Pitt, an affordable housing practitioner and TEDx speaker, launched an educational series on July 14, 2026, arguing that a lending practice once condemned by courts still shows up at affordable housing closings. He says requiring deeds in lieu of foreclosure before default shifts too much risk to community developers and helps worsen the 7.2 million-home shortage.

Why it matters: - Pitt says the practice discourages community developers from taking projects, especially those tied most closely to neighborhoods in need. - The result, he argues, is fewer affordable homes delivered in a market already short 7.2 million rental homes affordable and available to extremely low-income renters. - The issue is not just financing volume or zoning. Pitt says contract terms can decide whether mission-driven developers survive long enough to build.

What happened: - Christopher Pitt launched "Why Communities Can't Build Enough Affordable Housing" on July 14, 2026. - The series focuses first on a closing-table practice Pitt says still appears in affordable housing deals: requiring a deed in lieu of foreclosure before any default occurs. - Pitt is a 20-year affordable housing and community development practitioner, a TEDx speaker, and co-chair of ULI Baltimore's Affordable Housing Council.

The details: - A deed in lieu of foreclosure is normally a post-default workout tool used instead of foreclosure proceedings. - Pitt says requiring that instrument at closing changes the risk profile of an affordable housing project from day one. - He identifies four effects: the developer can lose the property even without a performance failure; experienced developers may walk away; emerging developers may accept excessive risk or leave the field; and the ownership cloud can scare off other lenders and investors. - Pitt says stalled projects mean fewer finished or near-finished homes in communities already facing severe shortages. - He said community developers answer to cities, agencies, land banks, and quasi-public lenders because affordable housing depends on those partners. - Pitt's view is that demanding the keys before the first payment is due is leverage, not partnership. - The United States Supreme Court held in Peugh v. Davis in 1878 that a borrower's equity of redemption cannot be waived by agreement at the time a loan is made. - Maryland's highest court reached a similar conclusion in C. Phillip Johnson Full Gospel Ministries, Inc. v. Investors Financial Services, LLC in 2011, holding that a deed in lieu executed at closing functions as a mortgage and is unenforceable as a deed. - Pitt says the people building affordable housing should not carry more risk than developers building luxury condominiums.

Between the lines: - Pitt is making a legal and structural argument, not just a funding argument. - The message targets lender behavior at the closing table, where risk can be shifted before a project even begins. - By framing the issue around older court rulings, Pitt is signaling that the practice may be vulnerable not only as policy, but also as a legal mismatch with how deed in lieu tools are meant to work.

What's next: - The series will continue across Pitt's platforms and examine one structural barrier at a time. - Pitt plans to use the series to push attention toward contractual terms he says are slowing affordable housing production.

The bottom line: - Pitt's central claim is simple: if community developers are forced to sign away too much protection at closing, fewer affordable homes get built.