###

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

• California’s housing inventory declined in March, with the Unsold Inventory Index for existing, single-family detached homes decreasing to 4.1 months in March, down from a revised 5.4 months in February and down from the 5.4-month supply in March 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.   Interest rates edged up slightly in March.  Thirty-year fixed-mortgage interest rates averaged 3.95 percent during March 2012, down from 4.84 percent in March 2011, according to Freddie Mac.  Adjustable-mortgage interest rates averaged 2.77 percent in March 2012, compared with 3.22 percent in March 2011.
  • The median number of days it took to sell a single-family home fell to 53.1 days in March 2012 and was down from a revised 57 days for the same period a year ago.
  • 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 160,000 members dedicated to the advancement of professionalism in real estate. C.A.R. is headquartered in Los Angeles.

  # # #

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

  March 2012	Median Price of Existing Single-Family Homes							Sales
  State/Region/County	March 2012	Feb. 2012		March 2011		MTM% Chg	YTY% Chg	MTM% Chg	YTY% Chg
  California Single-family (SAAR)	$291,080	$266,660	$286,550	r	9.2%	1.6%	-4.5%	-2.3%
  California Condo/Townhomes	$235,760	$216,520	$232,270	r	8.9%	1.5%	27.6%	0.7%
  Los Angeles Metropolitan Area	$276,270	$264,430	$272,600	4.5%	1.3%	29.8%	3.4%
  Inland Empire	$179,500	$172,600	$172,730	4.0%	3.9%	29.0%	1.7%
  San Francisco Bay Area	$478,330	$438,280	$486,010	r	9.1%	-1.6%	37.4%	0.7%
  San Francisco Bay Area
  Alameda	$425,000	$402,880	$480,250	5.5%	-11.5%	46.2%	-7.6%
  Contra-Costa (Central County)	$582,070	$515,620	$567,310	12.9%	2.6%	49.6%	5.9%
  Marin	$672,620	$732,140	$826,700	-8.1%	-18.6%	49.6%	2.3%
  Napa	$351,470	$348,000	$332,610	1.0%	5.7%	34.4%	11.0%
  San Francisco	$649,390	$592,950	$679,780	r	9.5%	-4.5%	26.1%	-2.8%
  San Mateo	$677,900	$582,500	$666,950	r	16.4%	1.6%	63.6%	16.8%
  Santa Clara	$575,250	$530,000	$550,250	r	8.5%	4.5%	36.2%	-4.5%
  Solano	$194,310	$179,020	$193,480	8.5%	0.4%	22.8%	1.1%
  Sonoma	$317,650	$324,710	$325,910	-2.2%	-2.5%	20.1%	4.8%
  Southern California
  Los Angeles	$272,920	$272,690	$282,170	0.1%	-3.3%	25.3%	1.2%
  Orange County	$485,300	$485,380	$523,610	0.0%	-7.3%	41.3%	12.0%
  Riverside County	$211,350	$200,730	$201,520	5.3%	4.9%	34.5%	4.1%
  San Bernardino	$131,640	$132,500	$130,690	-0.6%	0.7%	19.6%	-2.7%
  San Diego	$363,710	$362,470	$383,620	0.3%	-5.2%	24.0%	8.9%
  Ventura	$417,020	$392,350	$443,920	6.3%	-6.1%	40.4%	10.0%
  Central Coast
  Monterey	$314,900	$265,000	$255,900	r	18.8%	23.1%	28.3%	-11.1%
  San Luis Obispo	$380,140	$354,350	$362,700	7.3%	4.8%	27.0%	6.9%
  Santa Barbara	$405,380	$345,000	$436,360	r	17.5%	-7.1%	41.6%	15.0%
  Santa Cruz	$482,160	$499,950	$465,000	r	-3.6%	3.7%	37.1%	0.6%
  Central Valley
  Fresno	$137,350	$142,300	$138,120	-3.5%	-0.6%	19.6%	-3.7%
  Kern (Bakersfield)	$131,000	$120,000	r	$127,500	r	9.2%	2.7%	24.7%	-7.3%
  Kings County	$141,430	$144,440	$137,270	-2.1%	3.0%	12.5%	11.0%
  Madera	$125,000	$103,330	$133,530	21.0%	-6.4%	-2.4%	-49.4%
  Merced	$115,290	$119,280	$115,290	-3.3%	0.0%	11.3%	-22.0%
  Placer County	$268,750	$251,450	$253,750	6.9%	5.9%	13.4%	-1.5%
  Sacramento	$168,370	$163,870	$168,250	2.7%	0.1%	22.4%	-2.6%
  San Benito	$232,350	$255,500	$247,500	-9.1%	-6.1%	8.0%	3.8%
  Tulare	$121,280	$119,330	$121,950	1.6%	-0.5%	23.1%	-6.6%
  Other Counties in California
  Amador	$118,750	$176,670	$170,000	-32.8%	-30.1%	-6.0%	51.6%
  Butte County	$200,000	$177,860	$222,370	12.4%	-10.1%	9.1%	21.3%
  Humboldt	NA	$232,950	$250,000	NA	NA	-1.3%	18.8%
  Lake County	$110,000	$103,640	$94,170	6.1%	16.8%	8.7%	13.0%
  Tuolumne	$165,000	$165,000	$151,430	0.0%	9.0%	-3.0%	20.4%
  Mendocino	$225,000	$190,000	$192,500	18.4%	16.9%	38.7%	-4.4%
  Shasta	$148,420	$141,900	$154,810	4.6%	-4.1%	2.0%	9.9%
  Siskiyou County	$110,000	$123,330	$107,500	r	-10.8%	2.3%	-33.3%	-48.6%
  Tehama	$108,000	$85,000	$125,000	27.1%	-13.6%	15.8%	29.4

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

There are so many good digital cameras available today, it’s a challenge to decide which model offers the best mix of features for your real estate needs.

Image quality is a given. In fact, between a camera’s automatic settings and other advances, there’s minimal difficulty involved in capturing tour pictures or videos that don’t capture listings at their best. And whether you have a favorite camera brand, a preferred style such as a digital SLR, or something in between — there’s a solution for you.

With that in mind, here are a couple of key questions to consider: How will you use the camera, and how much time do you want to invest to master the photo and video process? Some of you, particularly if you deal in high-end listings, may conclude that hiring a pro photographer or videographer is the more practical approach.

Even so, every real estate professional requires some type of camera — if only to send pictures to clients from the field. Some of you may already be using your smartphone that way, and smartphone cameras are starting to encroach on the low end of the camera market. That will be examined further in a future guide. For now, we’ll focus on dedicated tools for capturing photos and video.

Villa Terracina House & Gardens
______________________________________

A Fundraiser for Assemblywoman
Cathleen Galgiani

Candidate For State Senate, District 5

___________________________________________________________

Wednesday, April 11, 2012
5:00 PM – 7:30 PM

1550 Terracina Circle, Manteca – Gates Will Be Open

Silent Art Auction

Wine, Hors D’oeuvres & Desserts will be served

Visit our Web site at: www.villaterracina.com
Contribute at: https://secure.actblue.com/page/villaterracina
Hosts: Dave Konesky & Dale A Gray

Galgiani for Senate 2012

ID#1340855

10011 Folsom Blvd, #263, Sacramento, CA 95827

___I/we will attend at $ 25/person – contribution amount_________

___Sorry I/We will not be able to attend, however please accept
a contribution of $_____________

________________________________________________________________________
Name

________________________________________________________________________
Name Employer

________________________________________________________________________
Address If self-employed
Name of Business

________________________________________________________________________
City, State, Zip
If a PAC, List ID#

________________________________________________________________________
Office Phone
Office Fax
Cell Phone

________________________________________________________________________
Email

________________________________________________________________________
Business Address City, State Zip

Contributions to Galgiani for Senate 2012 are not tax
deductible as charitable contributions for Federal income tax
purposes. Corporate checks are allowed. $3,900 maximum
allowed by law for individuals and companies. $7,800 maximum
allowed by law for Small Contributor Committees.

Make checks payable to: Galgiani for Senate 2012, ID# 1340855
10011 Folsom Blvd, #263, Sacramento, CA 95827

Please RSVP your attendance by email to
villaterracina@gmail.com
complete & attach this page to your email Or fax to 209-879-0406

Contribute online with Credit Card at

https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/villaterracina

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Congressman Dennis Cardoza (D-Merced) announced that 75 permanent supportive housing assistance vouchers totaling $471,701 have been awarded to the Merced, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin County Housing Authorities under the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Program (HUD-VASH).  This program is administered by HUD, Department of Veterans Affairs, and local housing agencies to provide permanent housing with case management and other supportive services for homeless veterans across the country.

In 2011, the Merced County Housing Authority came to Congressman Cardoza for help, after they were denied any HUD-VASH housing vouchers for the third year in a row.  Congressman Cardoza sent a letter to the Veterans Affairs office in San Francisco and worked tirelessly with HUD, the VA, and local authorities in Merced to correct this error so homeless veterans in Merced County would be included in the HUD-VASH program going forward.  With today’s announcement, the VA has reversed its previous position and recognized the need in Merced County for assisting homeless veterans.

“Our veterans have made enormous sacrifices for our country, and they deserve at the very least to have a safe and secure place to call home,” said Congressman Cardoza.  “These vouchers will help put a roof over the heads of many Central Valley veterans who are currently homeless.  I am pleased that the VA listened to my calls on behalf of Merced County’s homeless veterans, and will be awarding them housing vouchers this year.  We should be doing everything in our power to give those who have served the same level of support that they have selflessly given us.”

The 25 vouchers awarded to the Housing Authorities in Merced, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin Counties will provide permanent shelter to veterans and their families.  The Central Valley has been severely impacted by the ongoing housing and foreclosure crisis, and these vouchers are critical to reducing the number of homeless veterans in the region.

Rennise Ferrario, Executive Director of the Merced County Housing Authority said, “I am extremely grateful to see we have been included this year in the HUD-VASH program.  For homeless veterans who have nowhere to turn, this program is a godsend.  After being turned down the last three years, Congressman Cardoza and his staff dedicated time and effort to make sure this year would be different.”

With the 25 additional HUD-VASH vouchers just awarded, the San Joaquin Housing Authority will now total 85 vouchers.  Since 2010, there have been 9 participants that have successfully completed the program and no longer required the VASH voucher.  The current homeless population for veterans in San Joaquin County is an estimated 4.24 percent.

Barbara Kauss, Executive Director of the San Joaquin Housing Authority said, “The HUD-VASH voucher program is a perfect example of government agencies working together to solve real world problems for real people.  This program serves homeless veterans who would otherwise have few options.”

The grants announced today are part of $75 million appropriated for fiscal year 2012 to support the housing needs of approximately 10,500 homeless veterans nationwide.  VA Medical Centers (VAMC) provide supportive services and case management to eligible homeless veterans. This is the first of two rounds of the 2012 HUD-VASH funding.  HUD expects to announce the remaining funding by the end of this summer.

# # #