Central Valley Association of REALTORS®

C.A.R. calls for change of leadership at FHFA

byron — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 23:54:47 +0000

For release:
November 5, 2012

C.A.R. calls for change of leadership at FHFA

LOS ANGELES (Nov. 5) ? The following is a statement by the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS^® (C.A.R.) on last week?s announced REO bulk sale transaction between Fannie Mae, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and Colony Capital:

?Fannie Mae and FHFA?s decision to move forward with the REO bulk sale in California amounts to another gift to Wall Street at the expense of taxpayers,? said C.A.R. President LeFrancis Arnold. ?The deal, which calls for the sale of more than 400 foreclosed homes in Los Angeles and the Inland Empire, not only hurts taxpayers and prospective home buyers, but will also delay a full recovery in the housing market.?

The implementation of this ill-conceived program highlights the failure of FHFA to appropriately address this issue despite C.A.R. and others outlining alternatives. The botched execution of the REO bulk sales, and Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) and Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP) under FHFA?s oversight and leadership has demonstrated a lack of understanding of the housing market. Given these and other missteps, C.A.R. believes it is time for a change in leadership at the FHFA.?

C.A.R. opposes bulk sales in California because the state is experiencing a severe shortage of available housing, which will negatively impact the state?s housing market. The median home price in the Inland Empire is up 15 percent from $172,000 in February 2012 to $198,270 in September, and unsold inventory is down from 5.3 months to 3.8 months during the same period. The median home price in Los Angeles has risen 37 percent from $272,920 in February 2012 to $373,020 in September, and inventory is down from 5.7 months to 3.7 months.

Leading the way?® in California real estate for more than 100 years, the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (www.car.org) is one of the largest state trade organizations in the United States with 155,000 members dedicated to the advancement of professionalism in real estate. C.A.R. is headquartered in Los Angeles.

Red Alert: C.A.R. Opposing Conference Report that STALLS Housing Recovery

byron — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 20:38:53 +0000

Call Your Senator TODAY!

C.A.R. is OPPOSING a conference report, AB 278, containing anti-foreclosure legislation sponsored by the state Attorney General. C.A.R. opposes provisions in this measure which will allow anyone to stop the foreclosure process by filing a lawsuit, merited or not. C.A.R. agrees that careful and balanced reforms to the foreclosure process are necessary. However, C.A.R. opposes this conference report because it will further delay the housing recovery by inviting bad-faith lawsuits and defaults, and making it difficult for even well qualified borrowers to obtain financing. Financing is already very difficult to get. This conference report will only make a difficult situation worse.

Initially the Attorney General had sponsored a package of bills; the so-called the ?Homeowners Bill of Rights.? For procedural reasons, the majority of these bills have been under consideration by a Conference Committee made up of six legislators. REALTORS® had the opportunity to educate these legislators about C.A.R.?s concerns as part of Legislative Day and since then C.A.R. lobbyists have been working directly with the conferees and legislative staff to make them aware of the unintended consequences of some of these proposals. The Conference Committee has now issued its final report and it must be passed by both Houses of the legislature. These votes may occur as early as Monday, July 2nd.

Action Items

Please call your state Senator TODAY!

Call 1-800-969-3310 and enter your NRDS ID followed by the ?#? sign to be connected.

Ask your Senator or his or her staff to vote NO the conference report.

Please note: C.A.R. is only targeting Democratic Senators for this mobilization effort. If you live in a state Senate district represented by a Republican you may not be connected to your legislator?s office.
Background

The Attorney General has sponsored a package of bills to place into California law an expanded version of the national settlement between major banks and state attorneys general. The contents of some of these bills have been under consideration by a Conference Committee comprised of six members who have just approved a conference report on a party-line vote. Some provisions will have the unintended effect of drying up mortgage loans for anyone but the most well-qualified borrowers, and increasing the costs of all mortgages.

One provision allows any borrower, no matter what the circumstances, to file a lawsuit. This will encourage opportunistic lawyers to pursue frivolous lawsuits, bringing unnecessary and unjustifiable delays to an already difficult and time consuming process. The language is so vaguely written that the borrower doesn?t even have to show that they have been harmed to file suit and be awarded damages. One-sided attorneys? fees may still be awarded only to plaintiffs based on the very broad definition of a ?prevailing party? in the report. And, of course, if lenders don?t have the remedy of foreclosure to ensure they can recover their security in appropriate situations, they will be less likely to lend, credit will be less available and the housing market recovery will limp along even more slowly.
C.A.R. is OPPOSED to the conference report because:

? The housing market recovery is still fragile. About half of all sales are of distressed properties. By restricting a lender?s ability to foreclose and exposing them to unnecessary liability, this report will dry up inventory, and it will further discourage lending other than to the most highly qualified borrowers. Additionally, these bills will artificially slow down the foreclosure process, keeping properties off the market that are legitimately in foreclosure. Finally, by removing the threat of foreclosure, the bill erodes the incentive for short sales as well.

? The bill invites bad-faith defaults and lawsuits. By broadly defining under what circumstances a lawsuit can be filed, even those legitimately in foreclosure can ?game? the system. Additionally, the bill creates an incentive for plaintiffs? attorneys to file frivolous lawsuits even if no harm has been done to the borrower. The courts are already overwhelmed. This bill, by inviting frivolous lawsuits puts an additional strain on the already underfunded courts

? Lending is already tight. Even the best qualified borrowers are finding it difficult to obtain financing. By stopping legitimate foreclosures, banks will be forced to further tighten lending standards at the expense of homebuyers.

For More Information, please contact DeAnn Kerr at deannk@car.org

California housing market continues to post strong gains in May, home sales rise to highest level in more than three years; low inventory a critical issue

byron — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:55:26 +0000

LOS ANGELES (June 15) ? California?s housing market continued to improve in May, with home prices posting solid gains for the third straight month and home sales well above last year?s pace, the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS^® (C.A.R.) said today.

?California home sales were strong in May, continuing the gradual recovery of the California housing market,? said C.A.R. President LeFrancis Arnold. ?First-time buyers are recognizing that the housing market has hit bottom and are now seeing a sense of urgency to take advantage of ultra-low interest rates and advantageous home prices. Additionally, trade-up buyers are returning to the market after sitting it out for the past few years to get in on favorable home prices.?

Closed escrow sales of existing, single-family detached homes in California climbed 3.4 percent from April?s revised 553,670 to a seasonally adjusted annualized rate of 572,260 in May, according to information collected by C.A.R. from more than 90 local REALTOR^® associations and MLSs statewide. May sales surged 21.5 percent from May 2011?s revised 470,910 pace, marking the highest year-over-year sales increase since May 2009. The statewide sales figure represents what would be the total number of homes sold during 2012 if sales maintained the May pace throughout the year and is adjusted to account for seasonal factors that typically influence home sales.

The May 2012 sales pace was the highest since February 2009, when 598,770 homes were sold at a seasonally adjusted annualized rate.

Home prices appear to be stabilizing, with the median home price posting both month-over-month and year-over-year gains for the third consecutive month. The statewide median price of an existing, single-family detached home was $312,110 in May, the highest since September 2010.

May?s price was up 1 percent from a revised $309,050 in April and 6.6 percent from a revised $292,850 recorded in May 2011. The May 2012 figure was 27.3 percent higher than the cyclical bottom of $245,230 reached in February 2009. The median price has posted above the $300,000 level for the second straight month after remaining below that mark for 15 months.

The increase in the median price can be attributed to the strong sales increase in the higher-priced coastal regions, particularly in the San Francisco Bay Area, where job growth is strong and the economy is growing faster than other areas of the state.

California?s housing inventory sank lower in May, with the Unsold Inventory Index for existing, single-family detached homes dropping to 3.5 months in May, down from 4.2 months in April. May?s housing inventory was down from a revised 5.7 months in May 2011. The index indicates the number of months needed to sell the supply of homes on the market at the current sales rate. A 7-month supply is considered normal.

?Low housing inventory continues to be the critical issue in the California market,? said C.A.R. Vice President and Chief Economist Leslie Appleton-Young. ?Inventory levels have not been this low since December 2005, when the supply matched the current level. The Bay Area has the greatest shortage of homes for sale, with inventory levels in the two- to three-month range for Santa Clara, San Mateo, Alameda, and Contra Costa counties.?

Interest rates continued their downward trend in May, with 30-year fixed-mortgage interest rates averaging 3.80 percent, down from 3.91 percent in April and 4.64 percent in May 2011, according to Freddie Mac. Adjustable-mortgage interest rates averaged 2.74 percent in May, down from 2.78 in April and 3.13 percent in May 2011.

Homes are moving faster on the market with the median number of days it takes to sell a single-family home dropping to 46.6 days in May, down from a revised 48.9 days in April and 52.0 days in May 2011.

· View Unsold Inventory by price range.

Note: The County MLS median price and sales data in the tables are generated from a survey of more than 90 associations of REALTORS^® throughout the state, and represent statistics of existing single-family detached homes only. County sales data are not adjusted to account for seasonal factors that can influence home sales. Movements in sales prices should not be interpreted as changes in the cost of a standard home. Median prices can be influenced by changes in cost, as well as changes in the characteristics and the size of homes sold. Due to the low sales volume in some areas, median price changes in December may exhibit unusual fluctuation.

Leading the way…^® in California real estate for more than 100 years, the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS^® (www.car.org) is one of the largest state trade organizations in the United States with 155,000 members dedicated to the advancement of professionalism in real estate. C.A.R. is headquartered in Los Angeles.

# # #

May 2012 County Sales and Price Activity
(Regional and condo sales data not seasonally adjusted)

May 2012	Median Price of Existing Single-Family Homes							Sales
State/Region/County	May 2012	April 2012		May 2011		MTM% Chg	YTY% Chg	MTM% Chg	YTY% Chg
Calif. Single-family (SAAR)	$312,110	$309,050	r	$292,850	r	1.0%	6.6%	3.4%	21.5%
Calif. Condo/Townhomes	$245,530	$239,820	r	$233,390	r	2.4%	5.2%	7.5%	12.3%
Los Angeles Metropolitan Area	$289,280	$289,700		$276,680		-0.1%	4.6%	18.0%	18.2%
Inland Empire	$180,530	$181,770		$172,110		-0.7%	4.9%	16.5%	13.9%
San Francisco Bay Area	$550,400	$526,370		$510,800	r	4.6%	7.8%	13.2%	20.7%

San Francisco Bay Area
Alameda	$485,660	$456,910		$465,560	r	6.3%	4.3%	6.8%	19.5%
Contra-Costa (Central County)	$671,100	$626,970		$602,860		7.0%	11.3%	11.9%	25.7%
Marin	$791,670	$783,850		$807,140		1.0%	-1.9%	0.0%	27.3%
Napa	$343,750	$363,890		$377,270		-5.5%	-8.9%	24.6%	20.3%
San Francisco	$717,500	$693,750		$641,670		3.4%	11.8%	5.8%	2.1%
San Mateo	$775,000	$745,000		$800,000		4.0%	-3.1%	13.1%	13.6%
Santa Clara	$643,500	$636,000		$599,950	r	1.2%	7.3%	20.7%	23.5%
Solano	$192,980	$191,220		$191,850		0.9%	0.6%	15.4%	12.1%
Sonoma	$342,520	$343,750		$353,750		-0.4%	-3.2%	12.5%	40.5%
Southern California
Los Angeles	$274,000	$286,800		$271,540		-4.5%	0.9%	23.2%	17.9%
Orange County	$538,340	$513,950		$544,700		4.7%	-1.2%	10.7%	22.9%
Riverside County	$213,240	$213,950		$200,000		-0.3%	6.6%	17.7%	14.7%
San Bernardino	$134,660	$132,030		$127,380		2.0%	5.7%	14.4%	12.3%
San Diego	$379,800	$369,910		$382,300		2.7%	-0.7%	11.9%	25.6%
Ventura	$424,630	$427,320		$425,000		-0.6%	-0.1%	13.5%	38.2%
Central Coast
Monterey	$295,000	$280,000		$250,000	r	5.4%	18.0%	12.6%	5.4%
San Luis Obispo	$382,470	$360,670		$381,450		6.0%	0.3%	31.3%	42.8%
Santa Barbara	$518,180	$411,540		$428,950	r	25.9%	20.8%	30.7%	29.4%
Santa Cruz	$500,000	$475,000		$436,250	r	5.3%	14.6%	37.9%	50.7%
Central Valley
Fresno	$141,580	$140,100		$136,850	r	1.1%	3.5%	4.5%	3.3%
Kern (Bakersfield)	$137,000	$145,250	r	$135,000		-5.7%	1.5%	-0.7%	-13.5%
Kings County	$145,000	$151,870		$137,690		-4.5%	5.3%	-8.6%	-1.3%
Madera	$124,290	$137,500		$116,670		-9.6%	6.5%	-15.4%	-21.4%
Merced	$119,410	$120,000		$111,850		-0.5%	6.8%	6.7%	3.6%
Placer County	$275,000	$276,150		$255,490	r	-0.4%	7.6%	17.4%	10.3%
Sacramento	$169,880	$168,820	r	$166,240	r	0.6%	2.2%	14.9%	11.1%
San Benito	$275,000	$287,450		$275,000	r	-4.3%	0.0%	3.2%	-1.5%
Tulare	$123,190	$128,370		$117,960	r	-4.0%	4.4%	2.4%	-10.9%
Other Counties in California
Amador	$160,000	$183,330		$171,250		-12.7%	-6.6%	0.0%	12.2%
Butte County	$211,290	$197,620		$222,620		6.9%	-5.1%	-0.9%	38.1%
Humboldt	$229,810	$240,280		$250,000		-4.4%	-8.1%	13.0%	50.0%
Lake County	$128,000	$113,330		$105,560		12.9%	21.3%	46.2%	44.3%
Tuolumne	$160,000	$160,000		$181,430		0.0%	-11.8%	47.8%	28.3%
Mendocino	$254,540	$209,090		$281,250		21.7%	-9.5%	-7.7%	45.5%
Shasta	$161,480	$164,540		$151,110		-1.9%	6.9%	7.8%	-1.0%
Siskiyou County	$152,500	$103,330		$100,000	r	47.6%	52.5%	34.5%	39.3%
Tehama	$124,000	$160,000		$117,500		-22.5%	5.5%	26.3%	14.3%

May 2012 County Unsold Inventory and Time on Market
(Regional and condo sales data not seasonally adjusted)

May 2012	Unsold Inventory Index					Median Time on Market
State/Region/County	May 2012	April 2012		May 2011		May 2012	April 2012		May 2011
Calif. Single-family (SAAR)	3.5	4.2		5.7	r	46.6	48.9	r	52.0
Calif. Condo/Townhomes	3.6	4.0		6.0		53.6	55.3	r	57.9
Los Angeles Metropolitan Area	3.6	4.5		6.0		53.2	54.8		55.6
Inland Empire	3.3	4.4		5.2		50.7	52.5		51.5
San Francisco Bay Area	2.9	3.3		5.0		45.1	47.5		51.8	r

San Francisco Bay Area
Alameda	2.5	2.8		4.8		64.3	61.4		69.4
Contra-Costa (Central County)	2.5	2.8		4.9		64.4	70.2		78.3
Marin	4.4	4.1		6.5		47.8	41.4		55.4
Napa	5.2	6.5		7.3		79.0	59.1		57.4
San Francisco	3.7	4.0		5.2		29.8	37.0		47.0
San Mateo	2.3	2.5		3.9	r	21.4	23.0		24.9	r
Santa Clara	2.0	2.3		3.8	r	22.1	22.6		26.2	r
Solano	3.6	4.4		5.5		50.2	54.1		53.6
Sonoma	4.3	4.6		7.4		61.8	68.7		65.1
Southern California
Los Angeles	3.6	4.4		6.0		51.0	53.0		51.9
Orange County	4.3	4.8		7.1		65.1	61.7		70.1
Riverside County	3.1	4.5		4.9		56.4	56.3		57.8
San Bernardino	3.6	4.3		5.5		41.3	45.0		50.4
San Diego	4.2	4.8		6.8		43.4	47.4		49.7
Ventura	4.4	5.1		7.5		57.7	69.3		77.6
Central Coast
Monterey	3.4	4.1		5.4	r	38.0	43.7		39.5	r
San Luis Obispo	3.6	4.7		6.8		42.2	59.7		59.6
Santa Barbara	3.7	4.9		7.0		62.6	65.8		91.0	r
Santa Cruz	3.3	4.5		6.6	r	29.3	26.5		40.4	r
Central Valley
Fresno	4.1	4.3		4.7	r	28.0	28.3		39.5	r
Kern (Bakersfield)	2.0	3.4		3.9	r	NA	NA		NA
Kings County	3.6	3.4		5.3		61.0	50.1		37.0
Madera	3.8	3.5		4.9		45.5	29.3	r	44.2
Merced	2.7	3.0		4.1		35.8	48.4		32.9
Placer County	3.5	4.2	r	NA		28.3	29.3		51.6	r
Sacramento	3.1	4.0	r	4.7	r	28.6	29.5	r	41.4	r
San Benito	2.1	2.4		3.8	r	28.3	43.4		28.7	r
Tulare	3.7	3.9		4.6		25.4	28.3		39.9
Other Counties in California
Amador	6.5	6.4		8.0		61.0	72.6		46.7
Butte County	4.3	3.9		8.2		47.0	29.8		50.3
Humboldt	6.7	7.1	r	12.2		27.8	67.2		47.6
Lake County	4.3	6.2		7.7		82.4	94.6		88.7
Tuolumne	6.4	9.0		10.7		43.9	87.9		78.7
Mendocino	7.8	6.9		12.6		75.5	78.4		93.4
Shasta	4.6	4.8		6.1		28.9	25.6		44.4
Siskiyou County	10.3	12.6		16.8	r	63.9	68.3		70.7	r
Tehama	5.1	6.4		7.9		45.5	61.0		52.8

June Edition of Property Lines is Here!

byron — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 15:26:58 +0000

Check out our June Edition of Property Lines!

Click Here – June2012 – Property Lines

Your Guide to the RPA-CA Now on iBooks!

byron — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 17:06:16 +0000

The same great printed publication, ?Your Guide to the Residential Purchase Agreement (RPA-CA)? is now available for you to read on your iPad device.

The California Residential Purchase Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions (Form RPA-CA) is the cornerstone of every successful real estate transaction in California, and there are several essential concepts, principles, and facts about this form that all REALTORS® should know. This guide will cover how to complete all mandatory and recommended disclosures to ensure all commissions are paid in full and on time. Plus the iBook version of the guide comes with many embedded videos featuring C.A.R.?s Member Legal Services team discussing examples of cases commonly received along with highlighting important sections of the RPA-CA.

Have all of the important contract terms at your fingertips for only $19.95. To purchase, visit iBooks on your iPad or through the iTunes store at http://store.car.org/books-publications/electronic-publications/your-guide-to-the-residential-purchase-agreement-rpa-ca-for-the-ibook.html from a computer.

CVAR Redhawk Casino Bus Trip!!

byron — Thu, 31 May 2012 22:50:02 +0000

2^nd Annual CVAR RED HAWK CASINO BUS TRIP

Don?t miss the fun and the action

CVAR @ Red Hawk Casino, Click Here for the flyer!

When: Wednesday June 20^th 2012

Departure Time: 7:30 a.m. sharp don?t miss the

Where: Meet at St. Paul?s parking lot

Cost: $50.00 coupons from Red Hawk upon arrival

Coffee & Breakfast on the bus, raffle prizes,

This event is a fund raiser. All proceeds will go to the CVAR charitable foundation to be given to local charities. CVAR is a 501 C (3) organization

Tax ID# 94-3400819

Call Barbara Simpson 209-603-9438

To sign up for this event or any questions.

Food & raffle prizes are provided by our friends

Roni Gonzales & Pam Dew @ Diversified Capital Funding, Jeniffer Carrots @ Hampton Inn of Tracy

Ellen Petersen @ Old Republic Home Protection

Amy & Maureem @ i mortgage

Remember to Vote 6/6/2012!

byron — Tue, 29 May 2012 08:09:12 +0000

May 22, 2012 volunteers took time out of their busy days (after work no less) and came to CVAR to help encourage fellow Members to vote in the Primaries on June 6th, 2012. Our dedicated members make this organization the proactive and hard working Association that it is. We are here working for you! If you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact us at (209) 858-1700

Boxer Calls on Federal Housing Regulator to Take Immediate Action to Help Homeowners Refinance at Historically Low Rates

byron — Wed, 09 May 2012 09:32:51 +0000

Press Release of U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer

For Immediate Release:
May 3, 2012

Contact:
Washington D.C. Office (202) 224-3553

Senator Urges FHFA Director DeMarco to Ensure that Borrowers Can Shop Around For Best Deal Under Federal Refinancing Program

Washington, D.C. ? With average mortgage rates dropping to the lowest on record ? 3.84 percent for a 30-year fixed loan ? U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) today wrote a letter calling on Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Acting Director Edward DeMarco to immediately end the anti-competitive nature of the federal refinancing program, which is leaving too many homeowners paying higher rates than they should.

Currently under the Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP), many lenders who want to compete for the business of homeowners seeking to refinance find themselves at a huge disadvantage compared to the borrower?s existing servicer. As a result, many homeowners have only one choice ? refinancing through their current servicer ? rather than being able to shop around for the best deal.

?This lack of competition gives some lenders a captive market and means borrowers are often stuck with higher rates and less favorable terms,? Senator Boxer wrote in the letter. ?Current policy is rewarding banks with excess profits at the expense of struggling homeowners.?

In fact, a recent study by Amherst Securities Group found that HARP borrowers are paying as much as 53 basis points more than borrowers with other types of loans. On a $300,000 loan, this higher interest rate costs borrowers more than $1,200 each year, and an additional $34,500 over the life of the loan ? money that could be going directly into our economy.

Senator Boxer said, ?Refinancing at the lowest possible rate is a win-win for our families and for job creation.?

The Senator urged Director DeMarco to eliminate the barriers that are keeping lenders from competing with a borrower?s existing servicer to offer the best rates and terms ? including stricter underwriting criteria and full representations and warranties.

The full text of the Senator?s letter follows:

May 3, 2012

The Honorable Edward DeMarco
Acting Director
Federal Housing Finance Agency
400 7th Street SW
Washington, DC 20024

Dear Acting Director DeMarco:

I am encouraged to see the reports of increased interest among homeowners in refinancing through the Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP) as a result of recent changes to the program that you have undertaken.

However, I am greatly concerned about the lack of competition within HARP that means even those homeowners who are able to refinance continue to pay higher rates than they should.

Under HARP, lenders looking to compete with a borrower?s existing servicer continue to face barriers to participating in the program, including stricter underwriting criteria and full representations and warranties. As a result, many homeowners are being forced to refinance through their existing servicer, instead of being able to shop around for the best deal.

This lack of competition gives some lenders a captive market and means borrowers are often stuck with higher rates and less favorable terms. A recent study by Amherst Securities Group found that HARP borrowers are paying as much as 53 basis points more than borrowers with other types of loans. On a $300,000 loan, this higher interest rate costs borrowers nearly $100 more each month, and an additional $34,500 over the life of the loan. Current policy is rewarding banks with excess profits at the expense of struggling homeowners.

To level the playing field and unlock competition between banks for borrowers? business, FHFA should allow the same streamlined underwriting and associated representations and warranties for new servicers as they do for current servicers. Such competition will help ensure that the benefits of today?s historically low rates flow to homeowners, and not to the banks.

By taking these common-sense steps to help homeowners obtain the lowest rates possible, we will also help prevent foreclosures and strengthen our economy. I urge you to continue your efforts to expand streamlined refinancing opportunities to all responsible borrowers and look forward to hearing your response.

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

###

C.A.R.-sponsored bill that prevents banks from foreclosing after agreeing to a short sale scheduled for hearing next week

byron — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 22:16:08 +0000

LOS ANGELES (April 26) ? In another move to protect struggling California homeowners, the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS^® (C.A.R.), is sponsoring a bill so that homeowners who face losing their home and have negotiated a short sale in good faith with their lender or servicer are not forced to go through foreclosure.

Assembly Bill 1745 (Torres, D-Pomona) prevents lenders or servicers that have agreed to a ?short sale? from foreclosing on a home. For any number of reasons (e.g., sickness, job loss, etc.), a homeowner may be unable to continue making his or her monthly mortgage payment. Rather than go through a lengthy and stressful foreclosure process, the homeowner will attempt to negotiate a ?short? sale with the lender in which the lender agrees to accept less than the amount owed by the homeowner.

Foreclosures and short sales are usually handled by two different departments within banks. Unfortunately, these two departments often do not communicate with each other, which can frequently result in a homeowner being foreclosed upon, despite having previously negotiated a short sale with the same bank.

AB 1745 will likely result in banks implementing a dual tracking system to prevent foreclosing upon homeowners with whom they have already negotiated a short sale. The measure is scheduled for hearing on April 30 by the Assembly Banking and Finance Committee.

Leading the way…^® in California real estate for more than 100 years, the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS^®(www.car.org) is one of the largest state trade organizations in the United States with 155,000 members dedicated to the advancement of professionalism in real estate. C.A.R. is headquartered in Los Angeles.

###

A Community Conversation on the Future of Modesto’s Downtown

byron — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 17:26:38 +0000

April19 Modestos Downtown Conversation

A Community Conversation on the Future of Modesto?s Downtown

CVAR is working for you, and makes every effort to attend meetings that may affect you as a REALTOR® member of CVAR. Take a look at the event below, and what transpired at the meeting last night in Modesto and let us know what you think. We love to have our members? thoughts, comments, and opinions. You may respond on any of our 3 social networks, Facebook, Twitter, & Linkedin. Thank you!

Brief of the Event:

The event included a featured presentation by Joe Minicozzi followed by a panel discussion and community conversation. Those featured on the panel included Mayor Garrad Marsh, Chris Ricci with Common Wealth Modesto and X-Fest! organizer/promoter, and representatives from the development community – Peter Janopaul (local developer who recently purchased Modesto’s historic downtown post office) and John Given ( Principal of Investment & Development for CIM Group whom pioneered urban investment and development starting on Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica, the Gaslamp District in San Diego and Pasadena?s revival of Colorado Blvd.)

Joe Minicozzi is with Public Interest Partners, a private, for-profit real estate company that concentrates on urban infill, historic preservation and business start-ups in downtown Asheville, NC. He will be sharing results of a study he conducted in Modesto evaluating the impact of various development choices on City property tax revenues. Minicozzi has conducted similar studies in other communities across the nation and is finding the positive impact of downtown investment on city finances is often underestimated. See a recent profile of Minicozzi’s work here: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2012/03/simple-math-can-save-cities-bankruptcy/1629/

6:00 p.m: Welcome & Introduction

Judy Corbett- Executive Director, Local Government Commission

6:10 p.m: Modesto: The Dollars and Sense of Downtown Development

Joe Minicozzi

Mr. Minicozzi presented a slideshow presenting the downtown development growth of a city in North Carolina by the name of Ashville. Some background on Ashville shows that in the past the City faced similar developmental and revenue stream problems that Modesto faces today.

The slow decline of Ashville began in the 1950?s and 1960?s when development outside of downtown was encouraged by the City Council in the form of new expressways installed to connect the City. A large mall was developed on the outskirts of town encouraged by the infrastructure upgrades to the City in the form of expressways. In the 1970s and 1980s a large mall moved in, and the business in Downtown Ashville perished. In recent years the City has made a booming revival by incorporating intelligent investment decisions into the downtown revitalization strategy.

Modesto?s downtown today is looking to encourage business, and climb out of an economic slump. Mr. Minicozzi?s main point was that the same principles that were applied in Ashville can be applied in other cities with similar productive results. For example, Ashville did not go on a public building spree to spend their way out of their recession. Instead they revamped and revitalized existing buildings, which proved to be much less expensive than new construction costs. Additionally by building residential communities in these 3-6 story buildings the property taxes of those buildings dwarf the property taxes of large businesses like Walmart, or other large strip malls. The property taxes paid from a 5-6 story apartment building produces much more income to the City per acre than the larger business compounds because there are more people packed into that acre in the apartment building, than in the 30+ acre enclosures of a Walmart compounds. From the City?s business strategy perspective, which business would they rather have? Mr. Minicozzi’s argument was that produces lots of revenue on a small geographic area, or the one with less revenue that takes up 30 acres?

Ashville began investing in the revitalization of existing buildings downtown because that was less expensive than new construction. They then converted these buildings into revenue generating engines for the City by making them into residential apartment buildings where tenants pay property taxes that go straight to the City coffers. Promoting residential apartment living Downtown encourages pedestrian foot-traffic, which is one of the hallmarks of a thriving business community. One of the panelists made the point that you want the types of retail stores where people go in every day and spend about $5.00 for a coffee or something like that. In comparison people only go to the mega stores like Walmart once a month. By promoting small and successful retail business and residential apartment buildings in downtown Modesto Mr. Minicozzi suggests is a smart way to promote development and growth. Another smart move is to look at the downtown business atmosphere and see how many of those lots are tax producing.

7:00 p.m: A Panel Discussion with the following panelists:

Garrad Marsh ? Mayor, City of Modesto

Chris Ricci ? President, Chris Ricci Presents, Inc.

John Given ? Principle of Investmeent & Development, CIM Group

Peter Janopual ? CEO of the Peter Janopaul 3^rd Companies

Mayor Gerrad Marsh was asked: What do you see here that not all of us see in regard to an optimistic outlook for Modesto?

Mayor Marsh went on to describe the growth of Modesto in his lifetime, and how he always wanted to see the City grow. However, in recent years he has become concerned with the City growing beyond its means. He doesn?t want to see the City cease to use agriculture as one of its main traditional sources of revenue. He made the point that it is one of the best methods Modesto has for getting money to come into the City. Selling produce on a national and international basis does wonders for Modesto?s economy. Mayor Marsh is concerned with the state of the City and how it plans to develop into the future.

Mr. Ricci was asked: We need places where young creative professionals want to be. And unless we can create that in this area, we are going to lose them. What possibilities do you see here, that might make Modesto?s youngsters stay here?

Ricci went on to describe that Downtown has developed well in Modesto, with lots of restaurants and small businesses, including nightclubs and the State Theater. Additionally he sees the festivals that come through and the wealth they can bring. He noticed that entertainment-wise young people have many options, but what they don?t have is a place to live. He thinks it?s probably 60% cheaper to build the regular track house than to build downtown. 2^nd piece missing here is on the retail side. He thinks we need more small business retail downtown to stimulate the economy. What?s more important is that they need to be successful business retail. Right now Modesto has prime retail space downtown on J Street. It?s a problem that it?s not doing better and something that Modesto as a City needs to figure out.

Mr. Janopaul Spoke:

He remembers the population sign seeing 69,000 when he was in school in the 1070s and now it?s around 220,000. He made the point that the loss of one or more key retailers would set retail development growth downtown back very far. So it?s important to invest in the small business owner to encourage growth.

What?s missing from downtown?: Residential housing and he emphasizes the importance of avoiding new construction, he wants to focus on ?adaptive reuse of existing buildings.? New construction costs far too much, and is an inefficient use of minimal funding. If one retail project goes, there will be many to follow, so he hopes that doesn?t happen. The redevelopment money from 3 years ago is gone, and Modesto cannot build its way out of the current problem. He also thinks that Modesto should stick to its roots and its authentic character based on agriculture, and small downtown business models.

Mr. Given was asked: What advice would you give the City to make investment happen. What would it take for him to invest in this City?

Mr. Given replied that one of the wonderful things that has occurred in the U.S. (he started as a City Planner, 1976), there was only one product available and that was being delivered. So the conclusion was that that was what people wanted, because that?s what they were buying. Somewhere along the line a generational change occurred. He started working in 1980 on downtown LA, demographics were not all in place, but it?s been a tremendous explosion in two areas: 1) Diversity goes way beyond ethnic. Economic, age, lifestyle, household composition all encompass diversity ? and this no longer supports the suburban model for a majority of households in the U.S. anymore.

7:40: Comments from audience

Cities like capturing their authenticity to become successful.

Question 1: How do we get the cities and planners to recognize and agree that nightlife, and entertainment etc. is a good investment? How do we get new development here in Modesto?

Focusing on authenticity there is many ways. Make the artist part of the process. Ashville came up with the slogan that they need to stay funky, and keep the funk. It?s capturing the spirit of the community and making it work for everyone. Mr. Minicozzi used an example in Ashville where through the summer one year, a community member brought hula hoops downtown and gave them out to people. They had hula hoop fairs and had a lot of fun with a simple and cheap idea that the community together Downtown, which of course helped business.

8:00 p.m: Adjournment