« November 2011 | Main | January 2012 »

December 31, 2011

Body of Knowledge Issues. AI/MAI/Appraisal Institute/Foundation, 19th Century Thinking

Body of Knowledge Issues. AI/MAI/Appraisal Institute/Foundation, 19th Century Thinking

By Don Epley, MAI Director

Center for Real Estate Studies University of South Alabama

Abstract

"The two current bodies-of-knowledge used by appraiser candidates to qualify for a designation and to practice the profession contain topics in need of discussion and revision to estimate property value accurately. This paper identifies the most pressing topics and makes recommendations to improve the appraiser’s understanding and practice of the profession."

The entire article is available in PDF format: Body of Knowledge Issues.

http://www.appraiserresearch.org/fileadmin/user_upload/body-of-knowledge-issues/Abstract_20111010143708.pdf

 

You will have to read this nonsense for yourself.  For some reason I could not cut and paste which would make it easier for me to address each of my concerns, individually and crongrically.  Basically it is the most ridiculous paper I have read in the past 30, no 40 years.  It starts out with the rationalization that the mai, appraisal institute members did not use statical analysis because the data was not available.  I have been in the industry since the 70's and know full well that this data was available.  They then, as they do know, lack the expertise to use statistical inference effectively.  They have always maintained that appraisal was an "ART," this postulate makes it impossible to attempt a scientific approach to real estate valuations.  In fact it would be more appropriate to use statistics when valuing Goya vs. Rembrandt.

 

He blasts the National Association of Realtors, the Federal House Finance Agency, and the Chase-Shilling indices, but cannot produce a better one available from his potentiates, the appraisal institute/foundation.   

 

He talks about real estate statistics as if it were the production of Ball Barings, where you produce a million items, and accept or reject, the product line with a sample of ten thousand.  The first year statistics student knows that stastical analysis does not produce reliable results with small population.  Ah!. . .   READ IT THEN WE CAN DISCUSS IT FURTHER.

 

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

[ Yahoo! ] options

Commercial/Residential Appraiser Training (NATIONWIDE)

Commercial/Residential Appraiser Training (NATIONWIDE)
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2011-12-16, 3:59PM PST
 Reply to: job-pmb73-2756916827@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


All Appraiser Trainee's
 
Beginning January 1, 2012 the Harris Company, Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, and West Coast Appraisers will begin providing Appraisal Training for Residential and Commercial Appraiser Trainee's. The fee for the training will me a minimum of $10.00 to $25.00 per hour depending upon the experience of the Trainee.

Residential Trainee's should contact Eddy Lampkin at: Commercial Trainee's should contact Curtis D. Harris at

<strong>TELEPHONE CALLS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.</strong> Residential or Commercial Appraisers interested in accepting Trainee's should likewise contact the corresponding person. It is our vision that this program be available Nationwide. All respondents must include a Compressive Resume along with their request for admission.
 
We will be providing Appraiser Training only, <strong>NO</strong> <strong>EDUCATIONAL COURSES ARE OFFERED AT THIS TIME</strong>. Questions regarding Trainee Requirements MUST be directed to the Office of Real Estate Appraisers, The Appraisal Foundation, or the appropriate Regulatory Agency.

All Trainers and Trainee's will be given unlimited access to all our Website's, Blogs, and Social Networking Sites which will become fee based sites beginning mid-year 2012. Here's wishing all of you much success in 2012.
 

Thanks!
 Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
 State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant
 CTAC LEED Certification

 The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*
 1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
 310-251-3959 Cell
 <a href="Commercial/Residential Appraiser Training (NATIONWIDE)">WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com </a>
Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf
 Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/
 
We Make a Simple Pledge to
 
Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality
 
Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public
 
Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship
 
and
 
Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
 Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers
 
IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.
 
CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal
 

• Location: NATIONWIDE
 • Compensation: The fee for the training will me a minimum of $10.00 to $25.00 per hour dependin
 • This is a contract job.
 • OK to highlight this job opening for persons with disabilities
 •OK for recruiters to contact this job poster.
 •Please, no phone calls about this job!
 •Please do not contact job poster about other services, products or commercial interests.
 • OK to contact me about appearing in CL documentary series
 

 

 

 


PostingID: 2756916827

[ Yahoo! ] options

December 30, 2011

What’s Wrong with American Housing? the Appraisal Institute/Appraisal Foundation, MAI.

This is a "must read" for everyone in real estate, including brokers, appraisers, lenders, and yes even homeowners.  It is not a direct condemnation of the appraisal institute/appraisal foundation, mai, but is illustrative of how their inane practices-the use of non-arm's length transaction as sale comparables-have extirpated the downward move in real estate prices.  One thing important to note is that when the author speaks of "normal" sales or prices is what we in the industry call "Market" sales or prices.  All italicized items are comments from Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB   

FROM:

"Anthony Downs

The Brookings Institution

What’s Wrong with American Housing? the Appraisal Institute/Appraisal Foundation, MAI.

Foreclosures Are Suppressing Any Major Recovery in Housing Construction

Sales of foreclosed dwellings have increased greatly since 2006, from about 400,000 to almost two million in

2010. Foreclosure sales comprised a large percentage of all home sales in 2010, and will do so again in 2011. It

is difficult to determine exactly how many foreclosed homes have been sold monthly during any of the years from

2006 through April 2011. Realty Trac estimates that total housing foreclosure filings in each year were as shown

in the accompanying table “Calculating Normal and Foreclosure Sales and Prices, 2006-2010.” It usually takes

considerable time for each filing to result in seizure of the home by lenders and subsequent sales to buyers.

Roughly 25 percent of filings in any year result in foreclosure sales within that year; another 35 percent occur as

sales in the following year; the remainder are settled in some other way.

The National Association of Realtors (NAR) publishes the number of homes sold each year and estimates their

median prices. By subtracting the number of foreclosure sales from total sales, one can estimate the number of

homes sold that were not foreclosed. Realty Trac estimates the number of foreclosure filings each year and the

discount at which actual foreclosures are sold below “normal” prices. These inputs were used to construct the

accompanying table “Estimating Foreclosure and Normal Home Sales Prices by Trial and Error, Matching

Estimates to NAR Housing Data, With 30% Foreclosure Discount.”

This table shows that the percentage of all home sales each year consisting of foreclosure sales rose from 8.53

percent in 2006 to 40.2 percent in 2010. This huge increase in the share of all home sales coming from

foreclosures has greatly reduced the average price of all home sales together. Yet none of the three major

home price indicators explicitly takes into account the influence of the rising share of discounted

foreclosure sales upon either the average overall price or the price of normal, non-foreclosed home sales.

As a result, all three price measures over-estimate the price declines of non-foreclosed homes. In fact, in

2010, as best I can estimate, the sales prices of non-foreclosed homes actually rose slightly at the same time that

the three most commonly used price measures showed a slight decline in average housing prices (including

foreclosure sales).

These factors hugely undermined the willingness of possible home buyers to purchase homes. That offset the

decline in home prices that might otherwise have increased home buying incentives.

Three additional factors reinforced the unwillingness of many households to buy a home (reduced demand.) One was the large inventory of unsold homes, constantly replenished by additional home foreclosures. Potential buyers are reluctant

to buy if they believe home prices might fall farther. Another factor was competition from speculative investors

who were willing to pay all cash to buy homes – especially foreclosed homes being sold at large discounts. Such

investors hoped to rent the homes they bought out and later sell them at a profit after the economy recovered.

The Major Measures of U.S. Housing Prices Provide Misleading Information About What

Is Actually Happening to Such Prices

There are three major sources of information about current housing prices in the United States: the Case-Shiller

Index, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) data, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Index.

The Case-Shiller Index, owned by Standard and Poor’s, is the home price measure most often cited in the media.

It uses matched pairs of two sales of the same homes over time to measure price changes accurately, not

distorted by comparing prices of different quality homes. ( Now one must remember, what is the likelihood of a home selling twice within a short period 2006-2010 if there is sufficient equity, as opposed to one which is underwater over that same period of time.?  I propose that most of the paired sales used were foreclosure sales, reo sales, or short sales.)  However, it gathers data from only 20 major metropolitan areas in the United States, despite the fact that in 2009 the Census Bureau stated that there were 366 metropolitan areas (each with 50,000 or more residents). The 20 metro areas included in the Case-Shiller Index contained 104.9 million residents, or 40.78 percent of the entire U.S. metro population in 2009. Since the total U.S. population was 307.745 million in 2009, Case-Shiller covered only 34.4 percent of the total U.S. population,

omitting two-thirds. Moreover, the 20 metro areas in the Case-Shiller Index included most of those that had the

largest home price increases from 2000 to 2006. Hence they showed much greater home price increases from

2000 to 2006, and much larger declines from 2006 to 2010, than were true of home sales in the entire nation. This

can be seen in the accompanying chart entitled “Comparing Three Home Price Indices, 1989-2008.” It clearly

shows that the Case-Shiller Index rose much faster than the other two from 2000 through June 2006, then fell

faster than the other two through about May 2009.

transactions in over fifty metropolitan areas across the nation. From these data, the NAR computes the median

sales price for all these areas combined. However, the NAR price estimate suffers from two problems. First, it

uses median prices for each area and for the nation as a whole, rather than average prices. Second, it does not

correct for shifts in the sample of home types involved in sales during each period—so the median price actually

computed for sales in one period can be influenced by a change in the mix of types of homes sold from one

period to the next. On the other hand, since NAR uses data from a much larger number of metro areas than

Case-Shiller, errors caused by shifts in the types of homes being sold in each period are in part offset by the

larger sample of actual sales in far more locations.

The third index is the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s estimate of home sales prices. Its sample is confined to

purchase transactions eligible for financing by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. But it also uses data from many more

metro areas, grouped by regions of the country. And it uses the same matched pair analysis as the Case-Shiller

Index to protect from errors caused by changes in the types of homes that are sold in each period.

None of these indexes distinguishes between sales of foreclosed homes and sales of “normal” homes not

involved in foreclosures. But foreclosed homes typically sell at much lower prices than the same homes would if

they were not foreclosed. Realty Trac estimates that the average foreclosure discount is 20 to 30 percent.

Therefore, as the share of foreclosed sales rises in the total number of sales – as has been happening for several

years – the overall prices based on both types of transactions combined tends to decline, even if the sales prices

of “normal” (that is, non-foreclosed homes) are not falling at all. Based on data from Realty Trac, I estimate that

the share of foreclosed sales in total home sales has risen from about eight percent in 2006 to over 40 percent in

2010. For every 10 percent rise in the share of foreclosed homes in total sales above zero, the price of all sales

combined declines by one-tenth of the discounted price of foreclosure sales compared to normal sales. This can

be seen from the accompanying chart entitled “Relation Between Foreclosures and Overall Price Declines.”

The chart shows foreclosures are sold at prices 30 percent less than normal sales. Hence for every 10 percent rise in

the share of foreclosure sales, the overall price of all sales will be 3 percent lower than it would be without

foreclosure sales. Thus, if foreclosure sales reached 40 percent of all sales, the overall price of all sales would be

reduced by 12 percent below normal sales (3 percent times 4). The Case-Shiller Index shows that home prices of

all homes sold from the fourth quarter of 2007 to the first quarter of 2008 declined by 12.06 percent. That drop in

the overall price could have been caused by a rise in the share of foreclosed sales in all homes, rather than a

genuine decline in actual home prices, including prices of normal (non-foreclosed) homes sold. This assumes that

foreclosed sales are discounted 30 percent below normal sales.

One thing to note here is that I believe a Lack of Demand and High Levels of Forclosures are two sides of the same coin and therefore both CRITICAL to current market conditions.  Also i feel his Minor rating for inacurate indicies is underestimated consitering these values are improperly used by the appraisal institute/foundation on a regular basis, it to should have a CRITICAL rating.  In the final analysis what have we learned is that during any period of time there may be numerious markets, but always two, a Normal/Fair Market, and a Distressed Market,  and for sanity and economic reasons they SHOULD NEVER BE PRECEIVED AS ONE OR "BIFORCATED!"

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2011/1228_housing_downs/1228_housing_downs.pdf

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

[ Yahoo! ] options

December 29, 2011

Commercial/Residential Appraiser Training (NATIONWIDE)

Commercial/Residential Appraiser Training (NATIONWIDE)


Date: 2011-12-16, 3:59PM PST
Reply to: job-pmb73-2756916827@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]

All Appraiser Trainee's

Beginning January 1, 2012 the Harris Company, Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, and West Coast Appraisers will begin providing Appraisal Training for Residential and Commercial Appraiser Trainee's. The fee for the training will me a minimum of $10.00 to $25.00 per hour depending upon the experience of the Trainee.

Residential Trainee's should contact Eddy Lampkin at: Commercial Trainee's should contact Curtis D. Harris at

TELEPHONE CALLS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Residential or Commercial Appraisers interested in accepting Trainee's should likewise contact the corresponding person. It is our vision that this program be available Nationwide. All respondents must include a Compressive Resume along with their request for admission.

We will be providing Appraiser Training only, NO EDUCATIONAL COURSES ARE OFFERED AT THIS TIME. Questions regarding Trainee Requirements MUST be directed to the Office of Real Estate Appraisers, The Appraisal Foundation, or the appropriate Regulatory Agency.

All Trainers and Trainee's will be given unlimited access to all our Website's, Blogs, and Social Networking Sites which will become fee based sites beginning mid-year 2012. Here's wishing all of you much success in 2012.


Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant
CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*
1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell
WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com
Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf
Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal


  • Location: NATIONWIDE
  • Compensation: The fee for the training will me a minimum of $10.00 to $25.00 per hour dependin
  • This is a contract job.
  • OK to highlight this job opening for persons with disabilities
  • OK for recruiters to contact this job poster.
  • Please, no phone calls about this job!
  • Please do not contact job poster about other services, products or commercial interests.
  • OK to contact me about appearing in CL documentary series
  
  
PostingID: 2756916827
[ Yahoo! ] options

In 2004 and 2005, American homebuilders created over two million new housing units per year, including mobile homes. Then housing construction plummeted to under 600,000 new units per year, a record fall of 70 percent, and home prices fell drastically too.

Housing will not help lead the U.S. economy out of this recession, as it has done many times in past recessions. A major reason is that America’s housing industry suffers from nine deficiencies that limit its ability to meet our housing needs. Some of these deficiencies are not widely recognized or are even considered advantages by the housing industry. Until its problems are better and more widely understood, that industry will continue underserving U.S. housing needs. This article summarizes those nine deficiencies and then analyzes them in more detail.

The Nine Deficiencies

  1. The biggest deficiency is the lack of households willing and able to buy homes
  2. A combination of falling home prices, losses of jobs by millions of Americans, and low-quality home mortgages sold to home buyers led many home owning households to default on their mortgage payments.
  3. The federal government has tried several times to enable foreclosed home owners to remain in their homes, but its efforts have been limited because both banks and other mortgage lenders have fought taking any “haircuts” in their loan amounts to make that possible.
  4. The deduction of mortgage interest payments from the taxable incomes of home owners is a large government subsidy that provides most of its benefits to the wealthy owners of costly homes.
  5. Control over what types of homes are permitted within each community is completely exercised by that community’s local government, but many suburban governments are pressured by homeowners to exclude housing affordable to lower-income households.
  6. In each year, homebuilders construct as many new units as they can sell during that year. But doing so in prosperous periods requires selling into housing demands oriented towards the future.
  7. Many thousands of individuals and low-income households are essentially homeless.
  8. The measures of home prices used by the housing industry and major media distort what really happens to home prices.
  9. Bankers and other parties who normally provide loans to potential homebuyers have adopted stringent requirements for persons trying to qualify for home loans.
[ Yahoo! ] options

Minnesota Supreme Court Rules for Property Owners/Renters In Red Wing Challenge

Minnesota Supreme Court Rules for Property Owners/Renters In Red Wing Challenge

http://ij.org/about/4234
WEB RELEASE:
December 28, 2011
CONTACT: John Kramer (703) 682-9320

.social.dark .widget { clear:left; }

 

[Private Property]



Red Wing, Minn.
—Today the Minnesota Supreme Court handed down an important victory for Red Wing property owners and renters and for citizens across the state of Minnesota. The court allowed a property rights case to go forward that had been tied up by procedural hurdles for more than five years. The case challenges Red Wing’s rental inspection program, under which the city can enter and inspect people’s homes without any evidence that a code violation has taken place. The decision, which seriously examined the facts of the case and the practical impact of the law on plaintiffs’ rights, is a model of judicial engagement.

Nine landlords and two tenants from Red Wing, Minn.—who are represented by the public interest law firm the Institute for Justice—object to Red Wing’s rental inspection law. Many cities across Minnesota—including Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth and Rochester—have local laws like Red Wing’s that allow government officials to conduct housing inspections of all rented homes in the city, even if the tenant refuses to consent to the search and even if the government has no reason to believe there is a problem with the rental home or even with the building. The unusual alliance of landlords and tenants sued the city to prevent government inspectors from violating their rights.

“Red Wing’s unreasonable and unconstitutional inspection program allows government inspectors to poke around in practically every nook and cranny in your home—even closets and your bathroom,” said IJ Senior Attorney Dana Berliner. “Our clients sought to test the constitutionality of this law before it is used to illegally enter their homes. Now, thanks to the Minnesota Supreme Court, they will get an answer to that question. The courthouse door remains open for our clients.”

As the Minnesota Supreme Court pointed out, “The City has actually begun enforcing the rental inspection ordinance against appellants.” Therefore, there is a real dispute that affects plaintiffs’ rights, and the courts can go forward to address whether the law is unconstitutional.

Until today’s ruling, the city had announced its plan to continue to try to enter the plaintiffs’ homes without their consent and force the plaintiffs to engage in piecemeal litigation to protect themselves. With the ruling, the plaintiffs can settle the constitutionality of the law once and for all.

Landlord Robert McCaughtry, a plaintiff in the case, has had enough of the city’s inspection program. He said, “I’m not against the city having housing standards, but it’s wrong for the city to force its way into peoples’ homes without any evidence of a problem or code violation. I’m grateful that we’ll finally get our opportunity to show that this program is unconstitutional.”

“Increasingly local governments use ‘administrative warrant’ programs to skirt the protections of the Fourth Amendment and force their way into people’s homes,” said IJ Minnesota Chapter Attorney Anthony Sanders. “The Fourth Amendment, and the similar provision in the Minnesota Constitution, was intended to protect people’s property and privacy rights, and its standards—requiring probable cause of an actual violation of the law—are entirely reasonable and not something the government should be allowed to ignore.”

The court remanded the case to the Minnesota Court of Appeals to decide the issue the plaintiffs have been fighting for all along: whether the Minnesota Constitution allows inspections without probable cause.

“The Minnesota Supreme Court has regularly interpreted the Minnesota Constitution to provide greater protection for individual liberty than is provided by the U.S. Constitution,” said Berliner. “We believe this is an excellent opportunity to ensure all Minnesotans are free from unreasonable searches of their homes and properties.”

[ Yahoo! ] options

The Renters Right to Recycle Act (AB 818) was signed into law by California

California Renters Recycling Law

September 10, 2011

#fullpost{display:inline;}

 

The Renters Right to Recycle Act (AB 818) was signed into law by California Governor Jerry Brown, mandating recycling services for paper, plastic, bottles and cans in apartment buildings with five or more rental units.

California Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield (D-San Fernando Valley) authored the Renter's Right to Recycle Act on behalf of 7 million California apartment tenants who find it difficult to constantly drive around finding some place to recycle.

Only 39 percent of the state's apartment renters have an on-site recycling option. Consequently, the recycling rate in apartments is just 15 percent in California versus 50 percent for single-family homeowners.
http://www.californiality.com/2011/09/california-renters-recycling-law.html
[ Yahoo! ] options

Update On Redevelopment Law: The Supreme Court Makes it Official - Redevelopment Is Dead In California

Published By

Update On Redevelopment Law: The Supreme Court Makes it Official - Redevelopment Is Dead In California

By Michael Kiely and Phillip Tate

The California Supreme Court released its opinion today in California Redevelopment Association v. Matosantos, challenging the Legislature's adoption of AB 1X 26, providing for elimination of California redevelopment agencies (RDAs), and AB 1X 27, exempting from elimination any RDA that agrees to make its share of a $1.7 billion voluntary contribution of its revenues to other local government needs[1].



The Court has upheld the Constitutionality of AB 1X 26 and struck down AB 1X 27. The Court held that RDAs do not have a Constitutionally protected right to continue to exist, however, RDAs do have a protected right, pursuant to Proposition 22, to not be forced to make payments to other agencies. While the State argued that the payments under AB 1X 27 are voluntary, the Court disagreed. The Court found that the payments under AB 1X 27 are not in fact voluntary because an RDA would cease to exist if it did not make the payment. Because the defective provisions within AB 1X 27 cannot be severed, the entire bill fails. Conversely, AB 1X 26 can be severed from AB 1X 27.

As a result, AB 1X 26, which eliminates RDAs, remains in place and AB 1X 27, which would have allowed RDAs to make a payment and continue to exist, is struck down, meaning that RDAs are now effectively dissolved.

In its decision, the Court also upheld the “freeze” provisions of AB 1X 26, which suspended the ability of RDAs to use their funds or to incur new indebtedness. The Court’s opinion did not expressly address the effectiveness of the provisions of AB 1X 27 that purport to invalidate transactions entered into prior to the effective date of the bill.

The Court invoked its power of reformation to extend all applicable deadlines under AB 1X 26 by four months, the length of the stay imposed by the litigation. Accordingly, for example, RDA draft obligation schedules due on November 1, 2011 under AB 1X 27 will now be due on March 1, 2012.

The vote was 6-1. Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye issued a concurring and dissenting opinion arguing that both AB 1X 26 and AB 1X 27 are Constitutional.

As the court noted, the legislative record shows that at least some legislators preferred to have the package of the two bills, and did not desire to end redevelopment. Therefore, it is possible that there may be a legislative attempt to revive AB 1X 27, or something similar to it, with changes to address the Court's concerns that the voluntary continuation payments were not voluntary. Perhaps an approach would be to require that such payments come from the local sponsor governments’ general fund, rather than from the agencies themselves. From a state fiscal perspective, the ruling is good news, in that now substantially more than $1.7 billion anticipated under AB 1X27 will be available for the state budget crisis. So it is uncertain whether there will be the votes necessary to resuscitate the continuation of redevelopment agencies. It is seems even less likely that the Governor, who started this by proposing to eliminate redevelopment altogether, would sign such a bill.

County and school district officials will now begin the process of forming successor agencies to begin the unwinding and disposition of RDA assets. We can anticipate that agency obligations that existed prior to January 1, 2011 will be fully paid and performed. Successor agencies may also try to attack and unwind RDA deals cut after that date, particularly protective transfers from agencies to their local governments. In addition, successor agencies may also try to avoid earlier conditional agency obligations, for example, the sale of property for les than fair market value where the sale obligation is conditioned upon other financing to be approved by the agency.

After a run of more than 50 years, redevelopment and tax increment financing for development in California have come to an end.

Neither the content on this blog nor any transmissions between you and Sheppard Mullin through this blog are intended to provide legal or other advice or to create an attorney-client relationship.

In communicating with us through this blog, you should not provide any confidential information to us concerning any potential or actual legal matter you may have. Before providing any such information to us, you must obtain approval to do so from one of our lawyers.

By choosing to communicate with us without such prior approval, you understand and agree that Sheppard Mullin will have no duty to keep confidential any information you provide.

[ Yahoo! ] options

December 28, 2011

Redevelopment Agencies' Worst Nightmare Discussed before Supreme Court

Redevelopment Agencies' Worst Nightmare Discussed before Supreme Court

After yesterday’s California Supreme Court oral argument in California Redevelopment Association vs. Matosantos – the lawsuit challenging the state’s new pay-ransom-or-die redevelopment system – it’s still hard to tell where the court will go. But the biggest question that emerged was: What happens it the court upholds AB 1x 26, which abolishes redevelopment, but strikes down AB 1x 27, which permits redevelopment agencies to continue to exist if they pay a “remittance” to the state?

Apparently it’s a plausible scenario given the nature of Proposition 22, the successful 2010 initiative that sought to protect redevelopment funds from being raided by the state. AB 1x 26 might survive a constitutional challenge on the theory that, while Prop. 22 amended the constitution to prohibit raids, it didn’t explicitly protect redevelopment itself, meaning redevelopment agencies can be killed by statute. However, because AB 1x 27 calls for “remittances” to the state, that could be interpreted violating Prop. 22.

The net effect of upholding AB 1x 26 and striking down AB 1x 27, of course, would be to kill redevelopment completely – a worse outcome than the redevelopment agencies got from the Legislature and the governor.

The state’s lawyer, Deputy Attorney General Ross Moody, obviously would prefer that both laws be upheld. Steven Mayer of San Francisco’s Howard, Rice law firm – representing the California Redevelopment Association and the League of California Cities – said AB 1x 26 “is the whole ballgame to my clients”. Meanwhile, James Williams of the Santa Clara County Counsel’s office argued passionately to uphold AB 1x 26 and strike down AB 1x 27.

All three lawyers were pepped with questions during the 70-minute oral argument. Much of the questioning had to do with whether or not the remittances were truly voluntary and whether cities had any options for paying the remittance other than using tax-increment funding. AB 1x 27 could fall if the court found that the remittances are not voluntary and/or that the cities must use tax-increment funding to pay them – which would appear to be a violation of Proposition 22.

Moody argued that, in a facial challenge, the court had no choice but to accept the “voluntary” contribution idea at face value.

“It’s hard to argue it’s a voluntary payment,” Justice Carol Corrigan said.

“Everybody gets paid,” Moody responded. “Is that so bad?”

“It is if you want to keep doing redevelopment,” Corrigan said. “That’s a facile argument – they get to continue to exist just as long as they are wrapping things up.”

Moody called the remittance program not a ransom but, rather, “a legislative offer to participate in a program.” Not even all of the justices appeared to take that one seriously. “We’re from the government and we’re here to help you?” Justice Kathryn Werdegar gently mocked.

And a lot of the questioning focused on whether cities would any alternative in paying the remittances other than using tax-increment funding. Moody, of course, argued that it was entirely possible – and, in fact, heartily agreed with Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye asked whether cities could pass a tax increase to pay the remittances.

Mayer, on the other hand, basically argued that most cities have no other source of funds, so the practical reality is that they will have to use tax-increment financing to pay the remittances, possibly in violation of Prop. 22.

Williams from Santa Clara County made a passionate pitch that AB 1x 27 is unconstitutional. That’s not surprising considering the pickle the county is in. The San Jose Redevelopment Agency – once of the richest and most powerful agencies in the state – does not appear to have the money to pay the remittance; but if San Jose can figure out how to do so, the county will be out an enormous amount of money.

Mayer spent his final presentation responding to Williams and making what appeared to be circuitous arguments about why the two laws could not be severed – even though there is a severability clause in the language. Mayer noted at one point that, regardless of the statute, "The Legislature designed 27 because they wanted agencies to op-in....the Legislature did not intend to end redevelopment."

The court is expected to rule by mid-January, when the first installment of the remittance payments is due.

[ Yahoo! ] options

2011 Land Use Book Now Available

Municipal Minute

 

2011 Land Use Book Now Available

Posted: 28 Dec 2011 07:01 AM PST

The American Bar Association (State and Local Government Section) has published its annual compilation of land use-related articles and reports released in 2011.  At the Cutting Edge 2011, edited by Dwight Merriam, is an essential resource for land use lawyers, planning professionals, and others interested in keeping up with current trends and issues affecting land use law.    


The book covers a wide range of land use issues, including the following:

§ protecting citizen speech (anti-SLAPP);

§ local ethics rules and land use;

§ promoting green transportation choices;

§ land use regulation of cellular towers;

§ land banking of vacant property;

§ changes in beachfront property law;

§ comprehensive planning law;

§ form-based codes in New England;

§ the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA);

§ condemnation law; and

§ underutilization and the public use doctrine.

Three Ancel Glink attorneys contibuted to this year's publication.  David Silverman authored an article on promoting green transportation.  Brent Denzin and Julie Tappendorf co-authored an article on land banking of vacant property


Visit ABA's website (publications page) to get yours today!



 

[ Yahoo! ] options

TODAY'S NEWS

December 28, 2011

TODAY'S NEWS

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE: New affordable senior housing center opens in Oceanside

By Nathan Scharn // OCEANSIDE — Less than two months after opening, Lil Jackson Senior Community affordable housing complex already has more applicants than rooms. With its barbecue patio and tranquil fountain area, the three-story, 80-unit facility looks like a modern apartment complex where rents could easily exceed $1,000 a month. But tenants in the Lake Boulevard complex are low- to moderate-income residents older than 62. …

 

LAND USE / PLANNING / REGULATION

SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE: BART planners begin work on new vision for future

By Michael Cabanatuan // Way back in 1957, Bay Area planners were thinking big. Concerned about the booming population and worsening traffic congestion, they proposed a round-the-bay rapid transit network that eventually spawned today's BART. Now, 54 years and 4 million people later, it's BART's turn to think big. Planners are working on a new vision for the future - one that could include express trains, all-night service, new stations along existing lines, trains traveling different routes …

 

LOS ANGELES TIMES: High-rise planners do the Hollywood ruffle

By Steve Lopez [12/25/11] // If this is the season to be merry, many residents of Hollywood did not get the memo. Instead, they got a community development plan they look upon as their very own nightmare before Christmas. It happened earlier this month, when the Los Angeles City Planning Commission approved zoning changes that could make it easier to erect skyscrapers in the heart of Hollywood, forever changing the scale of a historic neighborhood with international cachet. …

 

CENTRAL VALLEY BUSINESS TIMES: Some of Lake Tahoe's private beaches can remain private

[12/27/11] // Four beaches on the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe -- Burnt Cedar Beach, Incline Beach, Ski Beach, and Hermit Beach – are private and can exclude non-property owners, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals says. The beaches are part of a 1968 improvement district that was funded by property owners in the immediate area. Part of the 1968 property restrictions says that rights to use the beaches go only to property owners and their descendents. …

 

HOUSING MARKETS / REAL ESTATE

THE DESERT SUN: U.S. home prices fall two months in a row

By Derek Kravitz (AP) // Washington -- U.S. home prices fell in most major cities for the second straight month, further evidence that the housing recovery will be bumpy and weigh on the broader economy in 2012. The Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller index released Tuesday showed prices dropped in October from September in 19 of the 20 cities tracked. The decline reflects the typical fall slowdown after the peak buying season. …

 

HOMELESSNESS

HOUSING FINANCE NEWS: Homelessness Drops 2 Percent in 2011

By Donna Kimura // On a single night last January, 636,017 people were homeless in America, a 2.1 percent decline from the year before, announced federal officials.  The annual “point-in-time” estimate of the number of homeless individuals and families is based on data reported by more than 3,000 cities and counties. Between 2010 and 2011, homelessness has gone down by every measure, said Shaun Donovan, secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).  Most notably homelessness among veterans declined by nearly 12 percent …

 

WHITTIER DAILY NEWS: New service promises hope to homeless families

By Steve Scauzillo // …They are one of three families taken in by Family Promise of San Gabriel Valley, a new kind of homeless shelter plus wrap-around services that opened Dec. 4 in Rosemead. Family Promise offers down-and-out families a lot more than a manger and hay. Their operating model takes from the old and the new in homeless ministries, said Lynnea Hughes, network director. Hughes is also a social worker who provides case-worker services to each family. "We are considered a shelter because we provide interim housing for families for 30 to 90 days. We're different because a lot of shelters don't provide those daytime services," Hughes said Wednesday …

 

SACRAMENTO BEE: Sacramento finds more beds for homeless

By Ryan Lillis // With frigid nights gripping the area, Sacramento city officials have come up with nearly 60 additional shelter beds for homeless men and women. The new beds are the result of a meeting last week between City Council members Steve Cohn and Jay Schenirer, along with homeless advocates, members of the faith community and downtown business leaders. Officials said they were prompted to find more beds …

 

HANFORD SENTINEL: Homeless emerge from holiday shadows

By Kevin Kennedy [12/26/11] // Asphalt Assault, a motorcycle club based in Kingsburg, came to Hanford Saturday to donate holiday meals to needy families and try to make a small dent in the county's growing homeless problem. Amid the hustle and bustle of the Christmas season, the location of the event behind the CVS Pharmacy next to Highway 198 was largely hidden - much like the homeless problem throughout the county. But it was right where many homeless spend their days and nights, next to the freeway …

 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

LONG BEACH PRESS-TELEGRAM: Welfare hit by perfect storm in California: slashed funds, dismal job market

By Sheila V. Kumar (AP) // SACRAMENTO -- Advocates of welfare reform in California often cite one, eye-popping statistic as they have pressed for cuts and changes to the program in recent years: The state has one-eighth of the nation's population but one-third of all welfare recipients. Yet steps taken in recent years to cut costs and get more recipients back in the workforce have run head-on into the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression. Recipients have been left with fewer training programs, shrinking welfare checks and a shorter period during which they are eligible …

 

ECONOMY / EMPLOYMENT

THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE: SAN BERNARDINO: Enterprise Zone gives record hiring credits

By Brian Rokos / The San Bernardino Valley Enterprise Zone, which provides businesses with financial incentives to locate and hire locally, has in 2011 far exceeded the number of hiring credits it issued in 2010, which is good news for difficult-to-hire workers. … Enterprise zones were created in 1986, and the San Bernardino zone is one of 42 in California. It includes most commercial and industrial areas in the cities of San Bernardino and Colton, as well as some unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County in Bloomington…

 

THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE: ENERGY: Long awaited solar construction jobs are snapped up

By Leslie Berkman [12/25/11] // … About two years ago, Russell, a former trucker, was struggling to find work and scrimping to make ends meet when he read about solar projects proposed in Inland Southern California’s Mojave Desert that would be the foundation for a burgeoning new industry for construction workers. … Russell is among 700 union craft workers employed by Bechtel Corp to build the $2.2 billion thermal solar power plant, which is expected to be the largest in the world. They will install thousands of mirrors called heliostats to focus the power of the sun on water-filled boilers that sit atop three giant steel towers under construction within view of motorists on Interstate 15.

 

TRANSPORTATION / TRANSIT

NORTH COUNTY TIMES: REGION: Census finds car-pooling decline as billions spent on lanes

By Chris Nichols [12/27/11] // New census data shows the number of car-pool commuters in San Diego and Riverside counties dropped significantly over the last decade, although billions of taxpayer dollars were earmarked for new car-pool lanes across the region. The percentage of San Diego County residents who carpooled to work fell from 13 percent in 2000 to 10.6 percent in 2010. In Riverside County, the drop was from 17.6 percent to 14.6 percent over the same period, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2010 American Community Survey…

 

PR NEWSWIRE: What's Ahead for Transportation in 2012?

WASHINGTON [11/28/11] // In the calm between the holidays, it's time to consider what lies ahead in the new year for the transportation community – federal and state legislators, state departments of transportation, and the transportation industry at large.  Many of these issues mirror the challenges facing the entire nation:  job creation, funding shortfalls, integrating new technology into older systems, aging infrastructure.  From its vantage point as the voice of transportation, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials [AASHTO] offers this look at the top 10 issues …

 

INFRASTRUCTURE / BONDS

SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE: Overturning of Prop. 13 sought in lawsuit

By Bob Egelko // …If the suit succeeds, it would restore majority-vote legislative approval for state tax increases - while leaving Prop. 13's property tax reductions intact. It would also change the balance of power in Sacramento, where minority Republicans routinely unite to prevent any increased levies. Prop. 13's chief advocate, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, is taking the suit seriously, said Jonathan Coupal, the association's president and a member of the legal team defending the measure. …

 

ENVIRONMENT / CLIMATE CHANGE

SACRAMENTO BEE: Cities battle proposal to tighten rules on storm water runoff

By Ed Fletcher [12/26/11] // Anonymous Lake Tahoe activists are marketing an odd keepsake - a calendar displaying photos of pipes dumping road water runoff into the lake. The storm drain calendar, produced by the mysterious Tahoe Pipe Club, features 12 outlets that activists contend are poisoning the lake with toxins and fine particles.

Storm water issues also have people up in arms in western Placer County. …

 

THE DAVIS ENTERPRISE: UC Davis urban forester engages youth in greening inner city

[By Pat Baily – OAKLAND] // …Tarver, who comes from what he calls “a very traditional forestry background of fighting fires and taking people on backpacking trips,” now focuses his attention on urban forestry -- the role that trees play in city and suburban communities. … But he also wants them to catch the excitement of all that science encompasses and understand the many benefits that trees offer for the urban environment. “Trees in urban areas not only lower the temperature, draw carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and produce oxygen, they also result in reductions in respiratory illnesses like asthma,” Tarver said. “And they reduce the amount of surface water and pollutants that run into the bay.”

 

[ Yahoo! ] options

PHYSICAL INSPECTION SCORES

PHYSICAL INSPECTION SCORES

http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/pis.html

HUD's Real Estate Assessment Center conducts physical property inspections of properties that are owned, insured or subsidized by HUD, including public housing and multifamily assisted housing. About 20,000 such inspections are conducted each year to ensure that assisted families have housing that is decent, safe, sanitary and in good repair. This page provides a full historical view of the results of those inspections, providing point-in-time property scores. Results are available for download as a comma-delimited dataset. Separate datasets are available for public housing and for multifamily assisted properties. The results represent the inspections conducted from 2001 through September 2009. The dataset includes property identifiers and location information.

Detailed descriptions of the inspection processes can be found in Federal Register notices 66 FR 59084 for public housing and 65 FR77230 for Office of Housing programs.

Making these inspection details available will enable researchers, advocacy groups and the general public to
1) better understand the physical condition of the HUD-assisted housing stock, as well as changes in the stock over time;
2) hold providers accountable for housing quality; and
3) plan for future affordable housing needs.

Download Public Housing Physical Inspection Scores 2011 (*.xls, 16 MB)

Download Multifamily Physical Inspection Scores 2011 (*.xls, 3.76 MB)

Download Public Housing Property Physical Inspection Dataset (*.txt, 18.3 MB)

Download Data Dictionary for Public Housing Property Physical Inspection Dataset

Download Multifamily Assisted Property Physical Inspection Dataset (*.txt, 21.1 MB)

Download Data Dictionary for Multifamily Assisted Property Physical Inspection Dataset

[ Yahoo! ] options

Appraiser Customary and Reasonable Fee Survey from OREP/Working RE

Appraiser Customary and Reasonable Fee Survey from OREP/Working RE


Directions: Please first select your state and then slect the closest metropolitan area(s) you work in for each question. Rural areas are included for each state. NOTE: This survey is for non AMC work. Fee quotes include the 1004MC form, as required by law. If you don’t provide a particular appraisal product, please leave that question blank.
Once you've completed the survey, please send the survey link to as many appraisers as possible and ask him/her to complete it. The value of this survey depends on participation.

*
1. Which state do you work in? (Please come back to complete the survey again if you work in multiple states.)

Please allow a few moments for the page to load.

AlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareFloridaGeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontanaNebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhioOklahomaOregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirginiaWashingtonWashington DCWest VirginiaWisconsinWyoming
Which state do you work in? (Please come back to complete the survey again if you work in multiple states.) Please allow a few moments for the page to load.
Opt-In to Working RE Online- Get Survey Results
One issue every other week is delivered via email to keep you up to date with industry news as it happens. It's free, you can opt-out at anytime and your information will always remain private. To opt-in, and to be notified when the results of this survey are posted, please email subscription@workingre.com with "Appraiser Newsletter" in the subject.
[ Yahoo! ] options

December 27, 2011

Distressed commercial real estate in retreat?

Distressed commercial real estate in retreat?

Distressed commercial real estate in the United States — including properties in default, foreclosure or taken back by lenders — totaled $171.6 billion in October 2011. That is a dip from the recent past.

The level of distress began to plateau when it reached $191.5 billion in March 2010, and it has stayed in the $175 billion to $190 billion range until now, according to data from Real Capital Analytics.

[ Yahoo! ] options

John S. Brenan, David S. Bunton

John S. Brenan, David S. Bunton



From: David Bunton [mailto:david@appraisalfoundation.org]
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 5:50 AM
To: Curits Harris
Cc: John Brenan; Staci Steward
Subject: RE: John S. Brenan, David S. Bunton

Mr. Harris: Thank you for your e-mail regarding recent correspondence by John Brenan regarding a position put forth by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). The opinions expressed by Mr. Brenan in his correspondence on Foundation Letter Head (sic) are those of The Appraisal Foundation and, with the exception of your correspondence, have been very well received. Regarding your Freedom of Information Act request, The Appraisal Foundation is a private non-profit organization and is therefore not subject to this act. Regards, Dave Bunton
[Curtis Harris]
 
Yes! I got an answer, not quite what I expected from the head of the Appraisal Foundation, but apropos for someone with his Political Training. " The opinions expressed by Mr. Brenan in his correspondence on Foundation Letter Head (sic) are those of The Appraisal Foundation and. . ." " A sic may also be used as a form of ridicule or as a humorous comment, by drawing attention to the original writer's mistakes.” Here he is attempting to ridicule me for the improper use of the word Letterhead, but in his ignorance he has misused the word (sic) which is more correctly used in brackets and is always italicized, i.e. [sic]. What was it that I once heard about the crackpot who thought he was throwing a lug only to find out it was a boomerang?
In any event this was a ridiculous attempt by me to draw attention to a very important issue facing the real estate industry, real estate appraisers using non-arm's length transactions to estimate Market Value.
  
From: Curits Harris [mailto:harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 10:23 PM
To: David Bunton
Cc: 8fad3708f17c60e0@typepad.com
Subject: John S. Brenan, David S. Bunton
[ Yahoo! ] options

inversecondemnation

inversecondemnation

 

Year-End Opinion Dump

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 11:57 AM PST

Now that we've decked the halls, its time to clear the decks: the end of 2011 is on the horizon, and in order to start 2012 off on a fresh note, here are opinions of interest lined up in our "to post" queue, but that we've not found the time to actually digest and post:

§ MH New Investments, LLC v. Dep't of Transportation, No. 5D10-2697 (Fla. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 2011) - plaintiff who owned license to use property is not entitled to claim business damages when the property is taken by eminent domain.

§ 260 North 12th Street, LLC v. State of Wisconsin Dep't of Transportation, No. 2009AP1557 (Wis. Dec. 22, 2011) - evidence of environmental contamination, disclosure of expert witnesses, and jury instructions in eminent domain trials. More here

§ Miller v. Glacier Development Co, L.L.C., No. 191,097 (Kan. Dec. 23, 2011) - "If the compensation finally awarded on appeal in an eminent domain proceeding is less than the amount of the appraisers' award paid by the condemnor to the clerk of the district court, the judge shall enter judgment in favor of the condemnor for the return of the difference, with interest. If the appraisers' award has been withdrawn from the clerk pursuant to the court's order, as provided in K.S.A. 26-510(b), the distributee of the appraisers' award shall be subject to the condemnor's judgment for the return of the difference between the appraisers' award and the final award on appeal."

§ Ybanez v. United States, No. 09-172L (Fed. Cl. Dec. 5, 2011) - measurement of just compensation in a rails-to-trails case: "Plaintiffs contend that the proper measure of compensation is the difference between values of their estates with railroad easements on them, and values with no easements or other hindrances. According to the Government, the railroad had not abandoned its easement before the NITU was  issued; therefore, the railroad easement continued to burden plaintiffs’ property when the taking occurred. The proper measure of damages under defendant’s theory would  be the difference between the value of plaintiffs’ property encumbered by a railroad easement and property encumbered by an easement for recreational trail use. We  grant plaintiffs’ motion for the reasons discussed below."

§ Cadlerock Properties Joint Venture, L.P. v. Comm'r of Environmental Protection, No. AC 32864 (Conn. Ct. App. Nov. 15, 2011) -  in an inverse condemnation action, the property owner did not prove that its property was uncontaminated.

§ Armstrong v. County of Dixon, No. S10-235 (Neb. Oct. 28, 2011) - attorneys fees in inverse condemnation cases.

§ Texas General Land Office v. Porretto, No. 01-09-00520-CV (Tex Ct. App. Aug. 4, 2011) - ownership of submerged and beachfront property.



This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

ALI-ABA Annual Eminent Domain Conference, January 26-28, 2012, San Diego

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 10:41 AM PST

ALI-ABAGet ready, it's that time of year again: the annual eminent domain law conferences by the American Law Institute-American Bar Association, this year to be held in San Diego from January 26-28, 2012.

Here's the description of Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation, the premiere program on condemnation law and related topics:

The power of eminent domain is being reshaped across the nation by court rulings and legislation. Much of the recent court activity and legislation has involved the controversial use, or attempted use, of eminent domain power to take private property for economic development by private parties. Redevelopment, however, is not the only fluid area in takings law. This national course of study addresses those areas where new developments in the law and procedure have and will reshape the practice. Learn what’s new in the cutting-edge areas of eminent domain law and how the practice in this field continues to evolve.

This popular and long running advanced course of study kicks off with a comprehensive update on eminent domain case law and legislation by a preeminent practitioner.

Each morning, the course focuses on hot issues and topics that affect practitioners today.

On Thursday and Friday afternoon, a dual track system addresses important substantive and practice topics in a series of breakout sessions. Registrants can learn about the key issues in substantive takings law from nationally recognized and experienced professionals. On the practice side, registrants can choose from another array of sessions chock full of practice pointers.

The course brings all the right participants together — lawyers, appraisers, condemning agencies, right-of-way professionals, and many others — to share valuable experiences and engage in healthy debate on these cutting-edge issues.

Networking opportunities are scheduled throughout the program, with breakfasts, networking breaks, a reception on Thursday afternoon, and social activities in the evenings arranged by a special Hospitality Committee. Come and meet with colleagues from around the nation, exchange ideas, enjoy the fellowship, and collect more than 16 hours of CLE credits.

This course runs concurrently with ALI-ABA's annual Course of Study, Condemnation 101: Making the Complex Simple in Eminent Domain. This unique format allows practitioners who are new in the field of eminent domain to network with many of the nation's most experienced condemnation lawyers, and to benefit from many of those same lawyers serving as their faculty. Special Offer: Attend Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation and bring an associate to Condemnation 101 for 50% off.  ADD TO CART

We're on the faculty ("The Role of Hawaii's Unique Property Law in the U.S. Supreme Court's Takings Cases"with Professor David Callies), so if you attend either course, please stop by and say hi.



 

[ Yahoo! ] options

December 24, 2011

Happy New Year, AI MAI, Appraisal Institute

Happr New Year, AI MAI, Appraisal Institute

http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/appraisal_institute/

[ Yahoo! ] options

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! 

Man, it seems as if I have been fighting all my life.  But then maybe that is what life is all about, and nomatter what your occupation or lifestyle it will and should continue untill the end. 

At this time of the year I like to think back and assess my position, which never seems to change by the way.  This year I have gone back 4 Years since we initally started publishing this blog.  Respectively I present the following:

Commercial Appraiser - Appraisal Blog, APPRAISAL/CONSULTING SERVICES: LA, Los Angeles, 310.337.1973

A Public Service of The Harris Company, Commercial and Forensic Real Estate Appraisers & Consultants, LA, Los Angeles. For appraisal or other consulting services we can be reached at 310.337.1973, harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net, http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Main

December 21, 2011

"Father Forgive Them (John S. Brenan) For They Know Not What They DO!"

"Father Forgive Them (John S. Brenan) For They Know Not What They DO!"

The following article written by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) is spot-on. It was followed up by communicate from John S. Brenan of the Appraisal Foundation/Institute (forgive me but most times it is hard to tell them apart) which for the most part is rambling and incoherent. Why is it so hard for these imbeciles to understand that in order to measure "MARKET VALUE" YOU NEED "MARKET SALES!!!!!" I have requested a copy or John S. Brenan's resume so that we can get to the bottom of this issue once and for all. http://www.icapweb.com/upload/121311%20NAHB%20Response.pdf He obviously does not understand Real Estate or Real Estate Markets.

Home > Newsroom > Flawed Appraisals Killing Home Sales, Hampering Housing Recovery

Flawed Appraisals Killing

Home Sales, Hampering

Housing Recovery

Normal View

December 8, 2011 - One out of three builders are reporting losing signed sales contracts during the

preceding six months because appraisals on their homes are less than the contract sales price, according to

a recent nationwide survey conducted by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB).

“The inappropriate use of distressed and foreclosed sales as comparables in determining new home values is

needlessly driving down home prices, killing home sales, causing more workers to lose their jobs and

delaying a housing and economic recovery,” said NAHB Chairman Bob Nielsen, a home builder from Reno,

Nev.

Too often, due to faulty appraisal practices, brand new homes with sparkling appliances and interior

upgrades get compared to a distressed property that has been sitting vacant and in disrepair. The result, in

many cases has been that the new house winds up getting appraised at less than the cost of construction.

That is precisely what is occurring in today’s marketplace, according to the NAHB survey, where a full 60

percent of respondents reported they were experiencing appraisals coming in below their contract sales

price.

Of those reporting that they had encountered this problem, 53 percent said the appraisal amount was actually

less than the cost of building the home.

“This is not only unfair and unreasonable, but it perpetuates the cycle of declining home values, drives more

home owners underwater, harms local economic activity and acts as an obstacle to the recovery of the

housing market,” said Nielsen.

These appraisal practices are a major contributing factor to the current acquisition, development and

construction (AD&C) lending crisis that has choked off credit for home builders and threatens to prolong the

current housing downturn.

Falling appraised values for land and subdivisions under development have led some financial institutions to

stop lending to developers and builders, to demand additional equity and even to call performing loans.

Since Sept. 2009, NAHB has held four appraisal summits in Washington with representatives of federal

banking regulators, the appraisal industry, the housing finance industry, the real estate and housing sectors

and others to find solutions that will allow appraisers to develop realistic valuations based on sales that are

truly comparable.

The need to give top priority to addressing the complexity of property valuations in distressed markets and

impediments to the flow of appropriate information on homes between appraisers and interested parties was

discussed during the most recent summit, which occurred on Oct. 19.

“Major reforms in appraisal practices and oversight are needed to ensure that appraisals accurately reflect

true market values and don’t contribute to price volatility or harm aspiring home owners and move-up

buyers,” said Nielsen. “We will continue to work with all stakeholders in this debate to find solutions.”

With the decline in home prices appearing to have ended or be coming to an end in most parts of the country,

resolving the appraisal and credit crunch issues remain a top priority for the association.

NAHB’s latest Improving Markets Index has shown modest signs of improvement in scattered housing

markets where employment is gaining and distressed properties are not as numerous.

New-home construction stands ready to serve as an engine for economic recovery. Building 100 single-family

homes creates more than 300 full-time jobs and provides $8.9 million in federal, state and local tax

revenues.

“Resolving inappropriate appraisal practices and restoring the flow of credit to home builders will not only help

to put America back to work, it will provide badly needed tax revenues that is essential for local governments

to support schools, police and firefighters in communities across the land,” said Nielsen.

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

December 20, 2011

mai Stephen J. Vertin Exposes the appraisal institute ineptitude

"mai Stephen J. Vertin Exposes the appraisal institute ineptitude

THEY (ai, mai, appraisal institute) HAS BEEN IN BUSINESS SINCE DEBACLE I AND ARE JUST NOW GETTING AROUND TO TEACHING THEIR MEMBERS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REAL AND PERSONAL pROPERTY, REDICulious!!! Aparently this course is very similar to all their courses, short on facts and long on theory, i.e. just made up stuff.

Stephen J. Vertin, MAI's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: 203 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2100, Chicago, Illinois
State: Illinois
Professional Status: Certified General Appraiser
Posts: 2,187
DefaultFundamentals of Separating Real and Personal Property

"Last week I took the new AI course Fundamentals of Separating Real and Personal Property from Intangible Business Assets. I did not put this in the educational forum section since it applies heavily to commercial work.

I believe this is the future in AI's development into business valuation. They promise courses will follow. It makes sense since many future businesses will not have real estate and the fact of 2014 changing accounting standards. You would not believe the sentiment that the future of RE appraising is doomed because of existing and coming governmental regulations.

The class was heavy in theory. If you are looking for a calculator class this is not it. It is great for understanding the basics and a must for appraisers doing real estate appraisals with intangible components. I applaud the effort to unite terminology covering some of the most basic issues used in most general practices. A must do in 2012 for those who have not taken it. Further it is required for SBA loans on such properties. The Chicago class last week was the second given."

December 17, 2011

ai, appraisal institute, mai seeks to continue its control over the Appraisal Industry

ai, appraisal institute, mai seeks to continue its control over the Appraisal Industry

" A related provision in the HERA Act requires FHA appraisers to have “demonstrated verifiable education in the appraisal requirement established by FHA1”. "FHA has contended that state certification suffices for this requirement2, and on this point, (ai, mai, appraisal institute) we disagree." http://appraisalinstitute.org/newsadvocacy/downloads/ltrs_tstmny/2011/AI-ASFMRAonFHAStateCertified.pdf

2 According to ML 08-39, “Moreover, FHA has determined that appraisers meeting the AQB criteria, as required by the FHA Appraiser Roster regulations, have “demonstrated verifiable education in the appraisal requirements established by FHA” under the new law.” Available at http://www.appraisal.state.az.us/userfiles/file/12%2008%20FHA%20Mortgagee%20Ltr.pdf

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

appraisal institute, mai, ai IN CYA MODE

appraisal institute, mai, ai. . .

IN CYA MODE

For years we have advocated that Appraisers should not use non-armslength (reo, short sales, listings, and probate) sales transactions to determine "Market Value." This practice has devastated the Real Estate Market. For the same amount of time this practice has been promoted by the appraisal institute, mai, ai, and it's members. The following Guide Note 11 was published in November of this year. It is an obvious attempt to cover their posterior. We encourage Realtors, Bankers, Mortgage Brokers, and HOME OWNERS to up the pressure and proceed with any and all civil actions against the ai, appraisal institute and its members. This "organization" has proven year after year, that their only objective is make their members and clients part of the 1% club.

The Harris Company, REA/C vows to provide our assistants to defeat these frauds and incompetents at the ai, appraisal institute, mai, and its members.

"Comparable Selection

Appraisers must consider all relevant transactions that have occurred in the market area and then determine which of those transactions should be used in the sales comparison analysis to arrive at a credible value opinion for the subject property. The best comps are those that are most similar to the subject property in terms of location, size, condition and other features that buyers and sellers believe make a difference to price. After selecting the best comps, the appraiser adjusts for material differences between each comp and the subject property. The appraiser must analyze each comp to GUIDE NOTE 11 48 Appraisal Institute Guide Notes

ascertain what adjustments are needed. Factors that may require adjustment include atypical buyer/seller motivations and sales concessions.

When the objective of the assignment is market value, ideally each comp selected for use in the sales comparison approach should have sold under the conditions specified in the definition of market value being used. For example, the buyer and seller should have been typically motivated. The seller should not have been under any compulsion to sell, nor the buyer under any compulsion to buy. The marketing effort and exposure time on the market should have been typical for that property type in that market. Payment should have been in cash or terms equivalent to cash; i.e., the seller should not have granted cash or non-cash concessions to bring a sale at the stated price.

When the conditions of the sale do not reflect the conditions outlined in the market value definition, either (1) the appraiser must consider making adjustments for such differences if it is to be used as a comp, or (2) the sale must not be used as a comp.

Distressed Sales as Comparables

Distressed sales such as foreclosure sales and short sales are common in a declining market. Depending on the severity of the local market downturn, some, many, or even all sales that occur do so under distressed conditions.

Appraisers cannot categorically discount foreclosures and short sales as potential comps in the sales comparison approach. However, due to differences between their conditions of sale and the conditions outlined in the market value definition they might not be usable as comps. Foreclosures and short sales usually do not meet the conditions outlined in the definition of market value. A short sale or a sale of a property that occurred prior to a foreclosure might have involved atypical seller motivations (e.g., a highly motivated seller.) A sale of a bank-owned property might have involved typical motivations, so the fact that it was a foreclosed property would not render it ineligible as a comp. However, if the foreclosed property was sold without a typical marketing program, or if it had become stigmatized as a foreclosure, it might need to be adjusted if used as a comp. Further, some foreclosed properties are in inferior condition, so adjustments for physical condition may be needed

As is always the case in selecting sales to use as comparables, appraisers must investigate the circumstances of each transaction, including whether atypical motivations were involved, sales concessions were involved, the property was exposed on the market for a typical amount of time, the marketing program was typical, or the property condition was compromised. Adjustments might need to be made for these circumstances. When it is necessary to use a distressed sale as a comp, the appraiser must carefully analyze the current local market to determine if an adjustment for conditions of sale is needed. If no adjustment is warranted, the lack of adjustment should be explained.

Physical condition and conditions of sale are two distinctly different factors that must be considered separately. They may be related to some degree in a distressed market, but not necessarily. An appraiser must not assume, for example, that a property was in inferior condition simply because it was a foreclosure.

The level of investigation needed to meet the requirement for sufficient diligence is generally more than is needed in non-distressed market situations. Further, supporting such adjustments can be particularly challenging when there are few current transactions to analyze. Competency in performing such investigation and analysis are required."

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

December 15, 2011

Appraisal Institute, mai, sra, Launches Investigation Into Appraisal Fraud

Appraisal Institute, mai, sra, Launches Investigation Into Appraisal Fraud
Richard Hagar wants copies of appraisals

My comment: He sent me this email yesterday.

I’m trying to obtain copies of appraisals, as many as possible from all across the US.

Somewhere in your office, is there an appraisal that you can send me?
These appraisals can be:
• Bad appraisal that should be turned in to the state;
• An appraisal that was performed by someone that was not geographically competent;
• An appraiser that blew the value or failed to follow USPAP or;
• An example of a good appraisal.

I don’t care where it came from, how you obtained it, I just want to have them.

Why? I’m trying to put together a study of appraisals. Did bad appraisals cause a loss, did good appraisals save a bank from collapse.

How many were USPAP compliant and who ordered it (AMC or direct)?
2001-2011 preferable.

So if you have an appraisal that you can send me (PDF, email, regular mail) I’d like to have it.

Richard Hagar SRA
rh@americanappraisals.com
or
7433 SE 27th Street
Mercer Island, WA 98040

comment: FYI, Richard Hagar is an expert on appraisal fraud. And, an excellent speaker and instructor. And, does a lot of work for attorneys. by AnnO'Rorke, mai ai, appraisal institute

November 14, 2011



Professional Liability Lawsuits
Subscribe via Email Email

As receiver for a failed financial institution, the FDIC may sue professionals who played a role in the failure of the institution in order to maximize recoveries. These individuals can include officers and directors, attorneys, accountants, appraisers, brokers, or others. Professional liability claims also include direct claims against insurance carriers such as fidelity bond carriers and title insurance companies.

The FDIC follows the policies adopted by the FDIC Board in 1992, Statement Concerning the Responsibilities of Bank Directors and Officers, which can be found at http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/5000-3300.html#fdic5000statementct, and require Board approval before actions are brought against directors and officers.

Professional liability suits are only pursued if they are both meritorious and cost-effective. Before seeking recoveries from professionals, the FDIC conducts a thorough investigation into the causes of the failure. Most investigations are completed within 18 months from the time the institution is closed. Prior to filing the claim, staff will attempt to settle with the responsible parties. If a settlement cannot be reached, however, a complaint will be filed, typically in federal court.

As receiver, the FDIC has three years for tort claims and six years for breach-of-contract claims to file suit from the time a bank is closed. If state law permits a longer time, the state statute of limitations is followed.

Professionals may be sued for either gross or simple negligence. The Supreme Court has ruled that the FDIC may pursue simple negligence claims against directors and officers if state law permits (Atherton v. FDIC). Federal law preempts state law that insulates directors and officers from gross negligence or worse conduct. Bank directors are allowed to exercise business judgment without incurring legal liability.

Not all bank failures result in Director and Officer (D&O) lawsuits. The FDIC brought claims against directors and officers in 24 percent of the bank failures between 1985 and 1992.

From 1986 through 2009, the FDIC and Resolution Trust Corporation collected $6.2 billion from professional liability claims. Over that same time, they spent $1.5 billion to fund all professional liability claims and investigations. Early in the process of professional liability claims, expenses will often exceed recoveries due to the costs incurred in handling new investigations. Professional liability program recoveries lag expenses by several years until settlements occur and judgments are awarded.

As of November 14, 2011, the FDIC has authorized suits in connection with 37 failed institutions against 340 individuals for D&O liability with damage claims of at least $7.6 billion. This includes 16 filed D&O lawsuits (2 of which have settled) naming 124 former directors and officers. The FDIC also has authorized 23 other lawsuits for fidelity bond, insurance, attorney malpractice, appraiser malpractice, and RMBS claims. In addition, 177 residential mortgage malpractice and fraud lawsuits are pending, consisting of lawsuits filed and inherited.

For additional background on Professional Liability Suits, please see Chapter 11 of "Managing the Crisis: The FDIC and RTC Experience" http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/managing/history1-11.pdf.

Authorized D&O DefendantsDamage Claims ($ millions)*
Authorized through 2010109$2,488.9
January 201110$60.2
February 201111$15.0
March 201128$1,007.9
April 201129$198.2
May 201121$92.7
June 201130$2,895.9
July 201110$54.6
August 201118$33.9
September 201128$375.1
October 201114$125.1
November 201132$217.1
Total340$7,564.6

*Losses typically exceed these amounts and may result in higher damage claims in filed lawsuits. Recovery on these claims is dependent upon available recovery sources, such as insurance and personal assets, and competing claims.

D&O Suits Filed

  1. FDIC as Receiver of IndyMac Bank, F.S.B. v. Van Dellen, et al., Case No. 2:10-cv-04915-DSF-SH (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Filed Jul. 2, 2010).
  2. FDIC as Receiver of Heritage Community Bank v. Saphir, et al., Case No. 1:10-cv-07009 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Filed Nov. 1, 2010).
  3. FDIC as Receiver of 1st Centennial Bank v. Appleton, et al., Case No. 2:11-cv-00476-DDP-PLA (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Filed Jan. 14, 2011).
  4. FDIC as Receiver of Integrity Bank of Alpharetta, GA v. Skow, et al., Case No. 1:11-cv-0111 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Filed Jan. 14, 2011).
  5. FDIC as Receiver of Corn Belt Bank and Trust Company v. Stark, et al., Case Number 3:11-cv-03060-JBM–BGC (U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois Filed Mar. 1, 2011).
  6. FDIC as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank v. Killinger, et al., Case No. 2:11-cv-000459 (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington Filed Mar. 16, 2011).
  7. FDIC as Receiver for Wheatland Bank v. Spangler, et al., Case No. 10-cv-4288 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Filed May 5, 2011).
  8. FDIC as Receiver of IndyMac Bank, F.S.B. v. Perry, Case No. 11-cv-5561-ODW-MRWx (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Filed Jul. 6, 2011).
  9. FDIC as Receiver of Haven Trust Bank v. Briscoe, Case No. 1:11-mi-99999-UNA (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Filed Jul. 14, 2011).
  10. FDIC as Receiver of Michigan Heritage Bank v. Cuttle, Case No.2:11-cv-13422-BAF-MKM (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan Filed Aug. 8, 2011).
  11. FDIC as Receiver of The Columbian Bank and Trust Co. v. McCaffree, Case No. 2:11-cv-02447-JAK-KGS (U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas Filed Aug. 9, 2011).
  12. FDIC as Receiver for Cooperative Bank v. Willetts, Case No. 7:11-cv-00165-BO (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina Filed Aug. 10, 2011).
  13. FDIC as Receiver for Silverton National Bank, N.A. v. Bryan, Case No. 1:11-cv-02790-JEC (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Filed Aug. 22, 2011).
  14. FDIC as Receiver for First National Bank of Nevada v. Dorris, Case No. 11-cv-01652-GMS (U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona Filed Aug. 23, 2011).
  15. FDIC as Receiver for Alpha Bank v. Blackwell, Case No. 11-cv-3423 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Filed Oct. 7, 2011).
  16. FDIC as Receiver for Mutual Bank v. Mahajan, Case No: 1:11-cv-07590 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Filed Oct. 25, 2011).

November 09, 2011

UAD Uniform Appraisal Data

http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/files/Curtis_Rosenthal.pdf

UAD Uniform Appraisal Data

November 07, 2011

Are predetermined Appraisal ADJUSTMENTS Legal/Ethical

Are predetermined Appraisal ADJUSTMENTS Legal/Ethical? Please see attached Predetermined adjustments provided
by
Curtis - Rosenthal, Inc. (MAI Appraiser Los Angeles) LLC. an MAI Firm. You be the judge and get back with us or call
them for this years update. If your property was acquired by the Los Angeles World Airport (LAWA) you had better read
this!

Appraisal Institute and Racial Discrimination,


Posted by Cochise
Commercial Appraiser
http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/files/http___mccoynet.pdf


It appears that discrimination is something that the Appraisal Institute knows a lot about. In fact they use to be called T
he American
Institute of Real Estate Appraisers
until they were sued, for discrimination, by the Federal Government. They then changed their
name to the Appraisal Institute, same pig, different shade of lipstick.
(The MAI Appraiser Standard, Larry A Mc Coy, MAI)
Application Local governments are not immune from proscriptions of Title VIII, and may be sued. United States v Black Jack ...
provides for actions against states and political subdivisions as well as actions against private transactions and practices;
comprehensive purpose of Fair Housing Act)... would be diluted if it were to apply only to actions of private individuals and entities. ...
applies to appraisers of real estate. United States v American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers etc. (1977, ND Ill) 442 F Supp
1072, 24 FR Serv 2d 880, app dismd (CA7 Ill) 590 F2d 242, 48 ALR Fed 657. 42 USCS ? 3604(a, b, d)’

October 26, 2011

RACISM STILL ALIVE AND WELL AT THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE

RACISM STILL ALIVE AND WELL AT THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE

Don't believe it? Check out their latest propaganda. A house organ with 14 pages, 31 photos and several hundred folks. No Blacks! Get the Picture?

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

October 25, 2011

Appraisal Institute Busted for RACISM

Appraisal Institute Busted for RACISM

Appraisal Institute Busted for RACISM

LEXSEE 442 F SUPP 1072

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, THE SOCIETY OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS, THE UNITED STATES LEAGUE OF SAVINGS ASSOCIATIONS, and THE MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, Defendants

No. 76 C 1448

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

442 F. Supp. 1072; 1977 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12760; 24 Fed. R. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 880

 

November 23, 1977

CASE SUMMARY:

 

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Defendants, institute and other organizations and individuals, filed a motion in the court for leave to intervene and oppose a proposed settlement agreement between plaintiff United States and the institute arising from a lawsuit under the Fair Housing Act (Act), 42 U.S.C.S. § 3601 et seq. The settling parties applied for entry of the proposed settlement order, approval of a settlement agreement, and a confidentiality order.

OVERVIEW: The United States filed a lawsuit against the institute and the other organizations pursuant to 42 U.S.C.S. § 3613, to secure relief from alleged violations of the Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The institute's motion to intervene as of right under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2) was before the court. The court denied the institute's motion to intervene, but granted an individual's motion for leave to intervene permissively under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b) solely for the purpose of contesting the legality of the settlement agreement insofar as it infringed his constitutional right to freedom of speech. The court approved the settlement order, the agreement, and the confidentiality order between the United States and the institute. The court found that the United States had stated a claim for relief under the terms of the Act. The court determined that the failure to submit the proposed settlement order to the membership for approval did not evidence inadequacy of representation, in light of the by-laws and a state statute. The court concluded that the institute's entry into the settlement agreement did not amount to a failure to fulfill its duty to represent its members.

OUTCOME: The court denied the institute's motion to intervene and oppose a proposed settlement arising from the United States' lawsuit against the institute and the other organizations and individuals under the Act. The court approved the settlement order, the settlement agreement, and the confidentiality order between the United States and the institute and ordered their immediate entry.

 

JUDGES: [**1] George N. Leighton United States District Judge.

OPINION BY: LEIGHTON

OPINION

[*1076] Memorandum

Before the Honorable George N. Leighton United States District Judge

This cause is before the court on the motion of F. Gregory Opelka and 71 other individuals for leave to intervene and oppose a proposed settlement agreement between plaintiff United States and defendant American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (hereinafter "AIREA" or "Institute"). Also, the settling parties have applied for entry of the proposed settlement order, approval of the settlement agreement and a confidentiality order between the United States and AIREA. For the following reasons, the motion to intervene as of right under Rule 24(a)(2), F.R.Civ.P., is denied; but the court grants Opelka leave to intervene permissively under Rule 24(b), F.R.Civ.P., solely for the purpose of contesting the legality of the settlement agreement insofar as it may infringe his constitutional right to freedom of speech. Further, the settlement order, the agreement, and the confidentiality order between the United States and AIREA are approved; their immediate entry is ordered.

I.

On April 16, 1976, the United States filed [**2] this suit against four organizations: The American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, the Society of Real Estate Appraisers, the United States League of Savings Associations, and the Mortgage Bankers Association of America, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3613, to secure relief from alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601, et seq. [hereinafter the "Fair Housing Act"]. The complaint alleges that since the effective date of the Fair Housing Act, defendants have engaged in unlawful discriminatory practices by promulgating standards which have caused appraisers and lenders to treat race and national origin as negative factors in determining the value of dwellings and in evaluating the soundness of home loans; and by failing to take adequate steps to correct the continuing effect of past discrimination and ensure non-discrimination by appraisers and lenders whose practices are subject to the influence or authority of the four organizations. Defendants' practices, it is alleged, have made dwellings unavailable to persons because of race and national origin; denied home loans to such persons; and have interfered with their [**3] exercise and enjoyment of rights secured by the Fair Housing Act in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a), 3605, and 3617. The United States seeks injunctive and declaratory relief from these alleged violations. Jurisdiction is invoked under 42 U.S.C. § 3613 and 28 U.S.C. § 1345.

After extensive negotiations, which included development of an affirmative action program, 1 the United States and AIREA have agreed not to seek a litigated resolution of their controversy. Instead, they have applied for entry of a settlement order which incorporates a proposed settlement agreement and affirmative action program. The agreement is divided into two parts: (1) the affirmative action program (Pts. I-VI); and (2) a plan for implementation [*1077] of the agreement and resolution of the litigation (Pts. VII-VIII).

1 The affirmative action program is, to a large extent, the product of negotiations between AIREA and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, Office of Voluntary Compliance (hereinafter "OFHEO/OVC").

[**4] In the affirmative action section, it is agreed that AIREA will adopt three fundamental policy statements:

(1) It is improper to base a conclusion or opinion of value upon the premise that the racial, ethnic, or religious homogeneity of the inhabitants of an area or of a property is necessary for maximum value.

(2) Racial, religious or ethnic factors are deemed unreliable predictors of value trends or price variance.

(3) It is improper to base a conclusion or opinion of value, or a conclusion with respect to neighborhood trends, upon stereotyped or biased presumptions relating to race, color, religion, sex or national origin or upon unsupported presumptions relating to the effective age or remaining life of the property being appraised or the life expectancy of the neighborhood in which it is located.

AIREA is to implement these stated general policies through specific changes in its textbook, The Appraisal of Real Estate, through review and, if necessary, prompt revision of its other instructional materials, courses, and seminars to ensure that they reflect the policy statements. Further, AIREA is to prepare, for use in its courses, an educational memorandum [**5] which explains civil rights legislation pertinent to the real estate appraisal profession. It is to develop special seminars for its members and the general public concerning appraisal of real estate and explaining the general policies and educational memorandum. AIREA agrees to add new explanatory comments to Canon 4 of Regulation 10 of its Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct. The comment is to clarify its position with respect to appraisal practices and its commitment to the stated general policies. In addition, it will add to the explanatory comments to Canon 5 a new reporting rule which provides, in part:

All written appraisal reports relating to residential real estate which state that a neighborhood is undergoing decline or is about to undergo decline must contain the specific facts or reasoning upon which the . . . conclusion . . . is based.

A similar provision is made requiring that the specific facts or reasoning upon which similar oral appraisal reports are based must be contained in the appraiser's files. AIREA will issue a new interpretation of Canon 6 which states that it is not improper for an appraiser to permit a government [**6] agency investigating alleged unlawful activity to have access to appraisal reports. The decision to permit or deny such access is reserved to the appraiser. AIREA agrees to maintain a procedure for review of the appraisal reports relating to residential real estate in order to ensure that members and candidates understand the general policies. It will also expand its recruitment and scholarship outreach program which is aimed at acquainting women and minority group members with opportunities in the real estate appraisal profession.

The implementation section of the settlement agreement provides a termination date at which time the parties will petition the court for dismissal of AIREA from the litigation. AIREA is to advise the OFHEO/OVC and the United States of each material step taken to implement the agreement. However, it is provided that no part of the agreement

shall be interpreted to limit AIREA's right to implement its plans or publish or distribute any materials which it has developed [pursuant to the affirmative action plan] without prior approval of Justice.

The United States will, however, be placed on AIREA's mailing list and, subject to the confidentiality [**7] order, will have access to AIREA's files which relate to the settlement obligation. AIREA may, at its sole option and discretion, obtain review and comments of the United States regarding any material it plans to distribute pursuant to the agreement.

The parties shall remain subject to the continuing jurisdiction of the court during the term of the agreement. The agreement is enforceable by court order, should the [*1078] parties disagree as to its interpretation following negotiations attempting to resolve the dispute. The settlement order specifically provides that it and the agreement

[do] not in any way affect any of the defendants to this action other than AIREA and shall not be deemed to limit or prejudice the rights of the United States or any of said other defendants to apply for any relief they deem appropriate whether or not such relief is different than or in addition to the remedies provided for herein.

Similarly, the agreement provides:

Except as expressly provided for herein and in the Settlement Order, this Settlement Agreement does not constitute a determination of the rights of any party to this litigation.

F. Gregory Opelka, [**8] an AIREA member, filed suit in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, against AIREA challenging its power to enter into the settlement agreement. On March 29, 1977, the circuit court issued an order restraining AIREA from executing the documents intended by the United States and AIREA to resolve the controversy between them. On March 31, 1977, this court entered a temporary order restraining Opelka from attacking the settlement agreement in any state or other federal court. The temporary restraining order was converted into a preliminary injunction on April 8, 1977. Shortly thereafter, Opelka moved for leave to intervene as a party defendant in this action.

Opelka's motion alleges that his interest as a member of AIREA is inadequately represented in this action because he and other AIREA members have not been given an opportunity to exercise their right to review and vote on the proposed settlement agreement. The complaint he seeks to file addresses itself solely to the propriety of the settlement. It alleges that the agreement has the effect of binding all AIREA members to its provisions in the practice of their profession and would violate their first amendment rights; [**9] that the governing council exceeded its authority under AIREA by-laws by entering into the agreement; that the agreement constitutes an amendment of the existing code of professional ethics; and that it constitutes a violation of the by-laws in that the agreement amounts to an amendment of the by-laws without proper notice to members. Therefore, Opelka seeks an order compelling AIREA to submit the settlement agreement to its members for their review and restraining AIREA from entering into it, prior to membership approval.

The United States and AIREA assert that Opelka cannot intervene as of right, but have no objection to his intervention, on a permissive basis, for the purpose of contesting the settlement agreement. 2 Opelka and the Society of Real Estate Appraisers (hereinafter "SREA" or "Society") oppose entry of the settlement order and agreement.

2 Both the United States and AIREA devote some attention in their briefs to opposing Opelka's intervention as a full party defendant. However, because Opelka's motion and proposed pleading indicate that he wishes to intervene only for the purpose of opposing the settlement agreement, the court finds intervention as a full party defendant is not proposed nor at issue here. See Rule 24(c), F.R.Civ.P.

[**10] II.

SREA's first, and fundamental, objection is that the court lacks jurisdiction to enter the settlement order because the Fair Housing Act does not apply to appraisers. While the court rejected that contention when it denied SREA's motion to dismiss, the court takes this opportunity to hold that the Fair Housing Act does apply to appraisers of real estate and that this court has jurisdiction over this action under 42 U.S.C. § 3613 and 28 U.S.C. § 1345. And having jurisdiction, it can grant declaratory judgment relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202. SREA's principal argument is that because sections 804(a) and 817 of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a), 3617, do not mention appraisers or the appraisal process, the Act does not reach the activities of appraisers. In pertinent part, these provisions declare:

[*1079] § 3604. Discrimination in sale or rental of housing

[It] shall be unlawful -

(a) To refuse to sell or rent after the making of a bona fide offer, or to refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental of, or otherwise make unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any person because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

§ [**11] 3617. Interference, coercion, or intimidation; enforcement by civil action

It shall be unlawful to coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any person in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his having aided or encouraged any other person in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by section 3603, 3604, 3605, or 3606 of this title. This section may be enforced by appropriate civil action. (Emphasis added.)

It is clear from the plain language of the provisions that appraisers are not exempted from their coverage; both sections are unrestricted with respect to the class of persons subject to their prohibition. The "otherwise make unavailable or deny" language of section 804(a) has been applied to a variety of conduct to prohibit all practices which have the effect of denying dwellings on prohibited grounds. For example, section 804(a) applies to racially exclusionary land use practices by a municipality. United States v. City of Black Jack, Missouri, 508 F.2d 1179 (8th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 422 U.S. 1042, 45 L. Ed. 2d 694, 95 S. Ct. 2656 (1975). It applies to "redlining" [**12] by financial institutions. Laufman v. Oakley Bldg. & Loan Co., 408 F. Supp. 489, 493 (S.D. Ohio 1976). It applies to delaying tactics and discouragement of rental applications used by resident managers and rental agents, and top management and owners who fail to set objective and reviewable procedures for rental applications. United States v. Youritan Construction Co., 370 F. Supp. 643, 648 (N.D.Cal. 1973), aff'd as modified, 509 F.2d 623 (9th Cir. 1975). Finally, it applies to racial "steering". Zuch v. Hussey, 366 F. Supp. 553, 556-57 (E.D. Mich. 1973).

The "or interferes with" language of section 817 has been similarly broadly applied to reach all practices which have the effect of interfering with the exercise of rights under the Act. See, e.g., Smith v. Stechel, 510 F.2d 1162 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. City of Black Jack, Missouri, supra; Laufman v. Oakley Bldg. & Loan Co., supra at 497-98. The Act requires a liberal construction if the statute is to prohibit effectively "all forms of discrimination, sophisticated as well as simple-minded. . . ." Williams v. Matthews Co., 499 F.2d 819, 826 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1027, 42 [**13] L. Ed. 2d 302, 95 S. Ct. 507 (1974). Given a broad interpretation of these provisions, it becomes clear that the United States has stated a claim for relief under their terms. The promulgation of standards which cause appraisers and lenders to treat race and national origin as a negative factor in determining the value of dwellings and in evaluating the soundness of home loans may effectively "make unavailable or deny" a "dwelling" and may "interfere" with persons in the exercise and enjoyment of rights guaranteed by the Act. When such denial or interference occurs as a result of considerations relating to race or national origin, sections 804(a) and 817 are transgressed. 3

3 The court further notes that it has jurisdiction to enter the settlement order and agreement under the teaching of Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 681-82, 90 L. Ed. 939, 66 S. Ct. 773 (1946). As was stated in Grabinger v. Conlisk, 320 F. Supp. 1213, 1217 (N.D. Ill. 1970), aff'd, 455 F.2d 490 (7th Cir. 1972):

When a claim is alleged to arise under the Constitution or laws of the United States, the federal district court must entertain the suit except when the alleged claim appears to be immaterial and made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction or where it is wholly insubstantial and frivolous.

[**14] III.

Absent a statutory right of intervention, Rule 24(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires the applicant to establish three elements as a prerequisite to intervention as of right: (1) an interest in the subject matter of the lawsuit; (2) the potential [*1080] for impairment of that interest; and (3) the inadequate representation of that interest by existing parties. See 3B Moore's Federal Practice, para. 24.09-1[1] (2d ed. 1977); 7A C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure, Civil §§ 1902, 1908 (1972); Comment, Intervention in Government Enforcement Actions, 89 Harv. L. Rev. 1174 (1976). Opelka argues that he has an interest in the entry of the settlement agreement and order which may be impaired by this court's disposition of the matter in that his right to commercial free speech and the economic conditions of his practice may thereby be affected. The gist of his argument is that the settlement agreement and order, if approved by this court, will bar him from utilizing racial and ethnic factors in making appraisals of residential real estate and thereby force him to ignore socioeconomic realities. He also argues that because the agreement [**15] binds all individual AIREA members, those who are jointly designated members of both AIREA and SREA will be placed in the untenable position of either adhering to SREA practices or complying with the settlement order. These arguments misapprehend the "interest" and "practical impairment" requirements of Rule 24(a)(2) as well as the substance and reach of the proposed settlement before the court.

The "interest" requirement of Rule 24(a)(2) has been recognized as "primarily a practical guide to disposing of lawsuits by involving as many apparently concerned persons as is compatible with efficiency and due process." Nuesse v. Camp, 128 U.S. App. D.C. 172, 385 F.2d 694, 700 (1967). The requirement is satisfied by something less than a specific legal or equitable interest in the chose. See, e.g., Cascade Natural Gas Corp. v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 386 U.S. 129, 132-36, 17 L. Ed. 2d 814, 87 S. Ct. 932 (1967); Johnson v. San Francisco Unified School Dist., 500 F.2d 349, 352-53 (9th Cir. 1974); Smuck v. Hobson, 132 U.S.App.D.C. 372, 408 F.2d 175 (1969); Nuesse v. Camp, supra. As one court has observed:

If barriers are needed to limit extension of the right [**16] to intervene, the criteria of practical harm to the applicant and the adequacy of representation by others are better suited to the task. Smuck v. Hobson, supra, 408 F.2d at 180.

In this case, however, the asserted interest and its impairment are intimately bound together. For Opelka's interest is no different from that of all members of AIREA or all jointly designated members of AIREA and SREA, a fact which is emphasized by the addition of 71 such individuals as proposed intervenors by amendment to the complaint for intervention. The interest asserted is one that involves not being bound by the terms of the proposed settlement agreement and order. However, the terms of the agreement and order make clear that no individual member of AIREA is bound as such. The agreement and order direct AIREA to take certain actions. But since these actions are to be taken by the organization as such, there is no apparent way in which Opelka, or any member of AIREA or SREA, could violate the agreement and order and thereby become subject to enforcement proceedings.

In Smuck v. Hobson, supra, the court rejected efforts by a former superintendent of schools and a member of the [**17] Board of Education of the District of Columbia to intervene as of right or to appeal a district court order which had found that the Board had, in a variety of ways, acted unconstitutionally in administering the school system. The court concluded that the ex-superintendent did not have an interest sufficient to allow intervention because:

The original decision was not a personal attack upon [him], nor did it bind him personally once he left office. Smuck v. Hobson, supra, 408 F.2d at 177.

The board member was found to have no appealable interest because the Board had been sued as a collective entity and the order was enforceable against the Board alone as such. Id. at 178. So too, here, Opelka has no separate interest as an individual in the [*1081] litigation which could be affected by the settlement order since the order cannot be enforced against him nor can he violate it. See also Rios v. Enterprise Ass'n Steamfitters Local U. 638, 520 F.2d 352 (2d Cir. 1975).

However, even assuming that Opelka satisfies the "interest" and "impairment" requirements, his application for intervention is legally insufficient because he does not show that his [**18] interest is one which may be inadequately represented by an existing party. The burden of establishing inadequacy of representation rests on the applicant. Trbovich v. United Mine Workers of America, 404 U.S. 528, 538 n.10, 30 L. Ed. 2d 686, 92 S. Ct. 630 (1972). And although that burden is minimal, it must nonetheless be met. Commonwealth of Virginia v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 542 F.2d 214, 216 (4th Cir. 1976).

Opelka alleges that the governing council of AIREA is adverse to himself and to the Institute. He claims this inadequacy of representation is shown by the alleged "nonfeasance" of the governing council in failing to apprise him and other AIREA members of the litigation's development and to provide them with an opportunity to review or to vote on the proposed settlement agreement. 4 The United States argues that Opelka's interests, and that of all voluntary members of the Institute, are adequately represented by AIREA.

4 Opelka also alleges that the governing council lacked power to enter into the settlement agreement and hence its acts are ultra vires. There is no merit in this contention. See Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 32, § 163a4(b), (p). The Institute's by-laws vest control of its affairs in the governing council, except that the membership elects the council and approves all amendments to the by-laws.

[**19] In United States v. Board of School Commissioners of Indianapolis, 466 F.2d 573 (7th Cir. 1972), the court of appeals affirmed a district court's denial of a petition to intervene in a school desegregation case by a corporation, Citizens of Indianapolis for Quality Schools ("CIQS"). CIQS sought to challenge the entry of a consent decree and stipulations between the government and the school board. The court conceded that requirements of interest and impairment had been met, but found the proposed intervenors had not demonstrated that their interest was inadequately represented by the school board. The court established a standard for determining the adequacy of representation:

[Representation] is adequate if no collusion is shown between the representative and an opposing party, if the representative does not have or represent an interest adverse to the proposed intervenor and if the representative does not fail in the fulfillment of his duty. Id. at 575.

The proposed intervenors' claims that the school board, by entering into the consent decree and stipulation, had "failed to assert [the proposed intervenors'] interests as vigorously and effectively [**20] as they would have had they been parties to the litigation" were insufficient to establish inadequacy of representation. Id. Opelka's claims are likewise insufficient.

Opelka does not allege directly that there is any collusion between the United States and AIREA; and it is clear that there is none. As United States v. Board of School Commissioners of Indianapolis, supra, demonstrates, entry into a proposed settlement does not constitute such collusion per se. Here, AIREA initially responded to the complaint by filing an answer which, in addition to denying the substantive allegations of the complaint, raised statutory and constitutional defenses. The proposed settlement agreement and order is the product of negotiations between AIREA and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, scheduled prior to this litigation and continued thereafter, with the Department of Justice joining the negotiations. The court cannot conclude that the decision to enter into the settlement order rather than engage in what promises to be, in light of proceedings thus far, extensive, costly and complex litigation, evidences in any way collusion on the part of AIREA and [**21] the United States.

[*1082] Equally clearly, AIREA does not have or represent an interest adverse to petitioner. The purpose of a professional organization is to further the interests of its members. Where a party litigant is charged with representing the proposed intervenor's interests, a compelling showing is required to demonstrate that this representation is inadequate. United States v. International Business Machines Corp., 62 F.R.D. 530, 536 (S.D.N.Y. 1974), citing 7A C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure Civil § 1909 (1972); Shapiro, Some Thoughts on Intervention Before Courts, Agencies, and Arbitrators, 81 Harv.L.Rev. 721, 748 (1964). In Stadin v. Union Electric Co., 309 F.2d 912 (8th Cir. 1962), cert. denied, 373 U.S. 915, 10 L. Ed. 2d 415, 83 S. Ct. 1298 (1963), a shareholder sought to intervene as a party plaintiff in two civil antitrust actions brought by his corporation. Following the refusal by the board of directors and shareholders to bring certain suits, the shareholder sought to intervene, alleging that the directors' refusal to bring suit and purchase of certain equipment on behalf of the corporation "at rigged prices" was [**22] not in good faith and was a breach of trust; and that the corporation's attorney and director inadequately represented the shareholder's interest because he was not on friendly terms with the shareholder and had voted against the shareholder's proposals. Noting that the allegations of the proposed intervenor were to be taken as true, the court nonetheless added the caveat that this

does not mean . . . all statements in pleadings of this kind are to be accepted as true irrespective of their nature or content. . . . [Only] matters well pleaded . . . are entitled to the preferential status of assumed truth. Conclusory statements are not. Id. at 917.

The court then examined the shareholder's allegations, finding:

[They] speak of management's voting against the Stadin resolution and they charge that this bespeaks condonation and bad faith. These latter characterizations are only the pleader's conclusions. . . . We cannot escape the conclusion that Stadin's complaint as to inadequacy of representation lies largely in the area of asserted disagreement between lawyers as to how litigation should be conducted. Mere difference of opinion among attorneys [**23] is not of itself inadequate representation within the meaning of the Rule. If it were, intervention as of right would become almost automatic. Id. at 919.

Piercing the allegations of Opelka's complaint, the court finds the asserted inadequacy of representation is only the pleader's conclusion based on a difference of opinion as to how this litigation should be conducted. Opelka points to the Institute's failure to keep members apprised of the litigation's progress and concludes that its failure to present the proposed settlement agreement to AIREA membership for approval demonstrates inadequacy of representation. But the governing council had no such obligation. The by-laws of the Institute vest control of its affairs in the governing council. Relevant state law confers on the Institute the power "[to] sue and be sued, complain and defend, in its corporate name." Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 32, § 163a4(b). The failure to submit the proposed settlement order to the membership for approval does not evidence inadequacy of representation, in light of the by-laws and state statute. Opelka makes no allegation of bad faith, but only of bad judgment, in that he believes the governing [**24] council has not asserted the membership's interests as vigorously and effectively as he would have. That he would have utilized different litigation tactics does not mean that the governing council does not adequately represent his interests in this litigation as a member of AIREA.

AIREA's entry into the settlement agreement does not amount to a failure to fulfill its duty to represent its members, for much the same reasons as discussed above. In Alleghany Corp. v. Kirby, 344 F.2d 571 (2d Cir. 1965), writ of cert. vacated as improvidently granted, 384 U.S. 28, 86 S. Ct. 1250, 16 L. Ed. 2d 335 [*1083] (1966), shareholders sought to intervene in a derivative action following a decision by the board of directors not to petition for a writ of certiorari. The court declined to determine the issue of adequacy of representation on the basis of the soundness or improvidence of the board's decision to terminate the litigation. The court stated:

Adequacy of representation . . . depends not on our assessment of whether the Board should have authorized a certiorari petition, but rather on whether shareholder interests were fully and fairly considered when the Board reached [**25] its decision. Stated somewhat differently, the mere fact that a particular decision is adverse to certain interests does not necessarily mean those interests were not adequately represented in the decision-making process or in the decision itself. Id. at 574.

In this case, AIREA's entry into the proposed settlement agreement does not mean that it failed in its duty to represent membership interests. And, absent allegations of collusion or bad faith, the court will not delve into the decision-making process of the governing council nor into the soundness of its decision to terminate this litigation rather than pursue it to judgment on the merits. The fact that Opelka's opinions did not prevail in the governing council does not mean that those opinions were not fully and fairly considered. Accordingly, the court concludes that he is not entitled to intervene as of right to challenge the settlement agreement.

IV.

The court thus turns to a determination of whether Opelka should be permitted to intervene on a permissive basis. The court notes that the numerous objections to the settlement agreement and order raised by Opelka are also raised by the Society. Where the proposed [**26] intervenor merely underlines issues of law already raised by the primary parties, permissive intervention is rarely appropriate.

Additional parties always take additional time. Even if they have no witnesses of their own, they are the source of additional questions, objections, briefs, arguments, motions and the like which tend to make the proceeding a Donnybrook Fair. Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Co. v. Manning, Maxwell & Moore, Inc., 51 F. Supp. 972, 973 (D.Mass. 1943).

Therefore, the court declines to allow full-scale intervention which will inevitably bring about delay, repetition and the clouding of issues involved in the original cause of action. See Stadin v. Union Electric Co., supra at 920.

However, it is appropriate to allow Opelka to intervene to address the merits of the settlement agreement. The district court's discretion under Rule 24(b), F.R.Civ.P., includes the latitude to limit intervention to particular issues. Van Hoomissen v. Xerox Corp., 497 F.2d 180, 181 (9th Cir. 1974); Ionian Shipping Co. v. British Law Ins. Co., 426 F.2d 186, 191-92 (2d Cir. 1970). Opelka has indicated that, if granted leave to intervene, he will adopt the [**27] arguments made and authorities cited in his memorandum of law in support of his application for leave to intervene and in opposition to the proposed settlement order. The primary parties to this litigation have no objection to Opelka's permissive intervention so long as it is limited to challenges to the settlement he makes in his memorandum. Accordingly, the court grants Opelka leave to intervene on a permissive basis, limiting that intervention to the arguments raised by him that the settlement agreement and order infringe his first amendment rights.

V.

In many respects, a consent decree is a contract between the parties thereto. United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 420 U.S. 223, 236-37 n.10, 43 L. Ed. 2d 148, 95 S. Ct. 926 (1975). Although it must have judicial approval, a court reviewing such a decree does not inquire into the precise legal rights of the parties. See Florida Trailer & Equipment Co. v. Deal, [*1084] 284 F.2d 567, 571 (5th Cir. 1960). However, the court must be certain that "there has been valid consent by the concerned parties and that the terms of the decree are not unlawful, unreasonable, or inequitable." United States v. City of Jackson, [**28] Mississippi, 519 F.2d 1147, 1151 (5th Cir. 1975).

It has been recognized that consent decrees are "highly useful tools." Id. at 1151. While waiving their right to litigate the issues involved in the suit, parties "save themselves the time, expense, and inevitable risk of litigation." United States v. Armour & Co., 402 U.S. 673, 681, 29 L. Ed. 2d 256, 91 S. Ct. 1752 (1971). Most important, however, "the agreement reached . . . embodies a compromise; in exchange for the saving of cost and elimination of risk, the parties each give up something they might have won had they proceeded with the litigation." Id. "[The] inherent nature of a compromise is to give up certain rights or benefits in return for others." MacDonald v. Chicago Milwaukee Corp., 565 F.2d 416, 429 (7th Cir. 1977). Hence, a consent decree is not a precise delineation of legal rights.

With these principles in mind, the court turns to decide whether the proposed settlement agreement and order in this case are valid. First, the court finds that AIREA consented to the agreement and order. The agreement and order are the result of extensive negotiations not only between AIREA and the United States, but [**29] between AIREA and OFHEO/OVC. AIREA and HUD had agreed, prior to institution of this litigation, that possibilities of developing an affirmative action program for AIREA would be explored. After this suit was filed, the United States initially sought to terminate the discussions, but later consented to their continuance, provided government representatives could be present. As negotiations proceeded, the United States and AIREA found that settlement could be reached. AIREA agreed to adopt the statement of general policies which it had determined reflects sound appraisal practices; the United States determined to its own satisfaction that the policies satisfy the requirements of the Fair Housing Act. The court thus finds that there had been a valid consent by the concerned parties. Second, the court finds that, as to AIREA, the terms of the decree are not unlawful, unreasonable, nor inequitable. While it is true that the parties may have surrendered certain rights and benefits they might have vindicated or obtained through litigation, the surrender was in return for other rights and benefits.

The Society of Real Estate Appraisers raises several objections which, it argues, bar [**30] the court's approval of the settlement agreement and order. First, SREA argues that judicial approval of the settlement agreement and order places a judicial imprimatur on a specific theory of real estate appraisal, thereby stifling the exchange of ideas within the profession and condemning alternative theories. This argument overstates the effect of the settlement agreement and order. A consent decree is not a litigated judgment on the merits. The court's approval of the settlement agreement and order is not the judicial adoption of the real estate appraisal policies adopted by the parties therein. Rather, it is an approval of a compromise between the parties as validly consented to and not unlawful.

Second, SREA argues that the court's approval of the settlement agreement and order will irreparably prejudice SREA's defense to this action. In United States v. City of Jackson, Mississippi, supra, the United States and black municipal employees brought separate suits to remedy alleged racial discrimination in employment. The district court rendered judgment in the government's suit on a consent decree providing for injunctive relief and back pay to incumbent and former employees. [**31] In rejecting the employees' motion to intervene and to block the decree on the ground that its stare decisis effect would impair their efforts to obtain relief, the court stated:

This argument gives insufficient consideration . . . both to the significant differences between a consent decree and [*1085] a litigated judgment on the merits and to the good sense of the federal trial bench. . . . We cannot assume that courts will not recognize the special characteristics and purposes of consent decrees. To the contrary, we believe that courts fully understand that such decrees do not purport to be definitive statements of the parties' legal rights and will accord them little or no weight in the determination of the rights of persons not party to them. Id. at 1151-52.

Cf. Air Lines Stewards & Stewardesses Ass'n, Local 550 v. American Airlines, Inc., 455 F.2d 101, 106 (7th Cir. 1972). So too, here, the settlement agreement and order between the United States and AIREA should have no effect on the determination of SREA's rights.

Third, SREA argues that entry of the order will adversely affect SREA professionally. The Society argues that it will suffer [**32] lost business and diminished enrollment because potential clients and students will fear that by working with SREA they will be violating federal law. SREA also argues that appraisers who are joint members of AIREA and SREA will be placed in an untenable position and may resign from SREA to avoid violating federal law. Again, this argument overestimates the consequences of a consent decree. Moreover, it is speculative.

Opelka joins in SREA's objections, which this court rejects, and raises several of his own. He argues that, by the terms of the agreement and order, he may neither consider or communicate ideas pertaining to racial and ethnic factors which he believes to be relevant to the appraisal profession. Thus, he argues, the order impermissibly infringes on his first amendment rights. See Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro, 431 U.S. 85, 97 S. Ct. 1614, 52 L. Ed. 2d 155 (1977). The short answer to this argument, as discussed in Part III, supra, is that the order does not bind him because he is not a party. It cannot be enforced against him nor can he violate it. Under these circumstances, it does not violate his first amendment rights.

The fact [**33] that Opelka, as a member of AIREA, is bound by its by-laws does not change this court's view for these reasons. First, there is nothing in the record to indicate the by-laws of the Institute have been altered by the settlement agreement and order. Second, without the force of governmental sanctions behind the by-laws, it is unclear that any first amendment problem is necessarily raised by the Institute's requirement that he comply with its by-laws or professional canons as a condition of continued membership. See Cannon v. University of Chicago, 559 F.2d 1063, 1068-71 (7th Cir. 1977); Driscoll v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 139, 484 F.2d 682, 690 (7th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 960, 39 L. Ed. 2d 575, 94 S. Ct. 1490 (1974); compare Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co., 419 U.S. 345, 42 L. Ed. 2d 477, 95 S. Ct. 449 (1974). Third, and most importantly, whether in the future Opelka may be adversely affected, and his legal rights infringed, by some AIREA action, either pursuant to the settlement agreement and order or otherwise, is a question that is not ripe for decision. We cannot adjudicate that issue on the basis of predictions about the [**34] possible conduct of either Opelka or AIREA; their behavior turns on contingencies and requires guesses about the future. In substance, Opelka requests this court "to provide [him] with guidance for the future rather than to resolve a pending or threatened controversy between adverse parties. [The court has] no power to render such advice . . . ." Hanover Township Federation of Teachers, Local 1954 v. Hanover Community School Corp., 457 F.2d 456, 463 (7th Cir. 1972). Therefore, whether, at some future date, AIREA might act in some way as to infringe Opelka's legal rights is a question this court cannot reach. For the reasons stated, the court hereby approves the settlement order, the agreement, and the confidentiality order between the United States and AIREA and orders their immediate entry.

George N. Leighton, United States District Judge

September 28, 2011

mai appraiser

September 24, 2011

High Performance Green Building: What’s it worth? Theddi Wright Chappell, MAI, Appraisal Institut, "CANNOT BE QUANTIFIED."

High Performance Green Building:

What’s it worth?

"Though the exact impact of the green strategies employed at Alley24 East on the project’s market value cannot be quantigied. . . " http://cascadiagbc.org/news/GBValueStudy.pdf

Theddi Wright Chappell, MAI, Appraisal Institute

,

September 20, 2011

Debacle III

Debacle III

Sale or Financing Concessions

Note: This field, comprised of two lines, is used to capture sale type, financing type,

and any concessions. The information must be entered on line 1 and line 2 as

indicated.

Line 1

The appraiser must indicate the sale type for each comparable property. If more than

one sale type applies to the comparable property, the appraiser must start at the top of

the list and identify the first sale type that applies. The valid values are:

ABBREVIATED

ENTRY

SALE TYPE

REO REO sale

Short Short sale

CrtOrd Court ordered sale

Estate Estate sale

Relo Relocation sale

NonArm Non-arms length sale

ArmLth Arms length sale

Listing Listing

Note, The appraiser may report any other relevant information regarding the sale type,

including whether more than one sale type applies, elsewhere in the appraisal report.

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely Fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

September 02, 2011

IV. FREQUENTLY COMMITTED SINS (by MAI-Appraisal Institute- AI appraisers) IN VALUING CONSERVATION EASEMENTS

IV. FREQUENTLY COMMITTED SINS IN VALUING IV. FREQUENTLY COMMITTED SINS (by MAI-Appraisal Institute- AI appraisers)

CONSERVATION EASEMENTS

Below is a short list of

some common problems found in limited scope reviews of more than 80 purported “qualified

appraisals” of conservation easements at the end of 2003.

Many, while not fatal, highlight appraisers’ lack of familiarity with the Treasury Regulations;

these are easy to correct. Others are considered to be more serious technical flaws. These "sins"

can be informative when completing or reviewing easement appraisals.

1. Serious Technical Issues

A. Appraising the wrong property. Care should be taken that the appraisal's legal description

reflects the area covered by the easement. In addition, there are instances in which the

appraiser does not value all of the donor’s and their family’s property before and after

imposition of the easement (thus it doesn't reflect "enhancement" value as described

above).

B. Relying entirely on the Subdivision Development Analysis technique (which bases the

easement's "before" value on revenues generated by the development of the property). In

order to be valid, the subdivision development plan must be a permitted use according to

local zoning codes, must be technically feasible, and must be a likely form of

development given the local market. Many Subdivision Development Analyses are

frequently supported by:

inadequate land use plan without engineering input and lacking substantiated

development costs.

poorly supported forecasts of lot sale prices,

poorly supported lot absorption forecasts,

poorly supported discount rates,

inadequate profit allocation

C. Appraisals of second- or third-phase easements where the impact of the earlier easements

was improperly accounted for. This is one of the common problems associated with the

phasing of easements (placing an easement on only a portion of the property, with the

intention of doing additional easements in the coming years).

D. Ignoring or omitting existing zoning or property restrictions, such as covenants, deed

restrictions, rights-of-way, or other pre-existing limitations on use of the property.

A Conservation Easement Appraisal Guide Page 34

2. Lack of Familiarity with the Treasury Regulations

A. Using the wrong definition of market value

B. Failure to state that the appraisal was prepared for the income tax purposes of the donor

C. Easements with effective dates beyond the 60-day shelf life of their appraisal's effective

dates of value

3. Other More Serious Issues Not Directly Related to Appraisals

A. Appraisals of conservation easements without evident conservation purpose. Easements

without obvious conservation values and purpose risk not qualifying under Internal

Revenue Code 170(h) and as such, risk not qualifying for Colorado's state income tax

credit.

B. Clever division of family-owned lands intended to maximize donors’ tax credits and to

avoid the issue of "enhancement" values. The phasing of easements is not uncommon and

should only be considered by a land trust if each phased easement can stand alone on

conservation values and purpose. However, it is not acceptable to shelter properties

through various names or other methods in order to skirt the constraints of the tax credit

rules or to avoid the enhancement value.

IV. FREQUENTLY COMMITTED SINS (by MAI-Appraisal Institute- AI appraisers)

August 30, 2011

John S Brenan, Appraisal FOundation

From: Curits Harris [mailto:harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 1:27 PM
To: 'wsj.ltrs@wsj.com'
Subject: Editor: Appraisal Foundation Letter of August 17, 2011

Editor,

RE: John S. Brenan https://appraisalfoundation.sharefile.com/d/sd41485a674242298
Director of Appraisal Issues

Your article was on the mark! These folks at the Appraisal Foundation/Appraisal Institute are totally lost. Please see the following statement by Sara http://financialservices.house.gov/UploadedFiles/071311stephens.pdf President of the Appraisal Institute. She is arguing against a PROPOSED federal law that would outlaw the use of Non-armslength sales transactions, when appraising market value. Also, it was reported that Four States have already banned this process. I have been in the Real Estate Business since 1984 and never used a non-armslength sale as comparable to a Market Transaction, all one has to do is read the Definition of Market Value.

1 Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, December 10, 2010

The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:

(1) buyer and seller are typically motivated;

(2) both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what he or she considers his or her own best interest;

(3) a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;

(4) payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and

(5) the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.

REO's, Probate Sales, Gifts, and other Distressed Property Sales do not come close to meeting this definition. Maybe one could, although I would not, argue that no (4) payment in cash, is acceptable. Besides where are his citations? I have never read in any publication that this was an acceptable practice. In other words, they are making this stuff as they go along.

He, Brenan, speaks of a bifurcated market, duh!, what he calls bifurcated is actually two markets, one fair and the other distressed. Just as you would never use a Fair Sale to value a distressed property (i.e. for salvage value) you should never use a distressed sale for a fair market sale.

One last comment, Of course distressed sales affect the fair sale market but to use distressed sales as comparable further extirpates the problem, forcing a downward arithmetic move to a geometric one. PLEASE KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK, THE REAL ESTATE MARKET HAS BEEN SEVERELY NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY THE APPRAISAL FOUNDATION/APPRAISAL INSTITUTE.

P.S

If you wish to discuss this issue any further my contact information is below.

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification


The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

A WORD OF CAUTION: When selecting an Appraiser, Consultant, or Expert please pay close attention to his Resume/CV

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

August 29, 2011

HOW THE APPRAISAL BUSINESS WORKS, CHRIS WILLIAMS, gEORGE hARRISON

Now this person George harrison attacks me re"

How the Appraisal Institute - mai - Destroyed the Real Estate Industry

Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB • "How the Appraisal Institute-MAI Destroyed the Real Estate Industry."

All,
We are currently working on a book titled "How the Appraisal Institute-MAI Destroyed the Real Estate Industry." The book will discuss both Debacles I, which occurred in the 90's and affected mainly Commercial Properties that were only appraised by MAI-Appraisal Institute Members. And, Debacle II which occurred shortly after the MAI-SRA-Appraisal Institute entry into the Residential Appraiser Market. We are investigating their involvement with Tax Frauds in the Land Trust Tax Credit Program. Fraud and the overvaluation of real estate to close Real Estate Transactions and Mortgages. The fact that they were suspended and kicked out of the Appraisal Foundation, for their involvement in activities contrary to the Foundations Doctrine. Their, MAI-Appraisal Institute, present promulgation that appraisers should use non-arm's length sales transactions as comparables, contrary to logic, public policy, and law. The Fraud around their advertising that they are the best in the field, a real estate field, when very few of them have degrees in Real Estate. Their affiliation with Financial Institutions. Not to mention their latest report to congress which is full of lies and misrepresentations
http://financialservices.house.gov/UploadedFiles/071311stephens.pdf

The survival of the real estate industry depends on your assistance, the MAI-Appraisal Institute must go. If you can provide appraisals, information, or other documentation in support of, or rejecting, our premise please, please, contact me at the following email address. harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net

WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR COMMENTS AND A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM sARA.

George HarrisonI think that Curtis is misguided, but if he should go through with the book he should take Paul's advice. Some of what is said is inaccurate. The SRAs were always residential appraisers, and while you can blame some AI members for the '80s debacle, this last round was mostly licensed/certified unaffiliated appraisers. I really hate to see such animus toward the AI at a time when it has spent so much of its resources reprsenting appraisers at state and national level. No, I'm not a member, and I have a lot of genuine complaints, but today I find myself (and every informed appraiser) to be aligned with, and supportive of, the AI.

1 hour ago

I RESPOND:

August 27, 2011

How the Appraisal Institute Destroyed the Real Estate Industry

How the Appraisal Institute Destroyed the Real Estate Industry

Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB • "How the Appraisal Institute-MAI Destroyed the Real Estate Industry."

All,
We are currently working on a book titled "How the Appraisal Institute-MAI Destroyed the Real Estate Industry." The book will discuss both Debacles I, which occurred in the 90's and affected mainly Commercial Properties that were only appraised by MAI-Appraisal Institute Members. And, Debacle II which occurred shortly after the MAI-SRA-Appraisal Institute entry into the Residential Appraiser Market. We are investigating their involvement with Tax Frauds in the Land Trust Tax Credit Program. Fraud and the overvaluation of real estate to close Real Estate Transactions and Mortgages. The fact that they were suspended and kicked out of the Appraisal Foundation, for their involvement in activities contrary to the Foundations Doctrine. Their, MAI-Appraisal Institute, present promulgation that appraisers should use non-arm's length sales transactions as comparables, contrary to logic, public policy, and law. The Fraud around their advertising that they are the best in the field, a real estate field, when very few of them have degrees in Real Estate. Their affiliation with Financial Institutions. Not to mention their latest report to congress which is full of lies and misrepresentations
http://financialservices.house.gov/UploadedFiles/071311stephens.pdf

The survival of the real estate industry depends on your assistance, the MAI-Appraisal Institute must go. If you can provide appraisals, information, or other documentation in support of, or rejecting, our premise please, please, contact me at the following email address. harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net

WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR COMMENTS AND A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM sARA.

John O'Dwyer, MAI, MRICSThis comment is most likely not going yo last long as a post, but his dude Harris is a loose canon. His mind is a jumble and his opinions are most definitely extreme. As far as I know, but I can not be 100% certain, he has been ousted from other discussion groups. My advice is just don't play along!

Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REBHi John, didn't realize you were still in business. For all of you who do not know john, he is one of those frauds, mai, from the appraisal institute, posing as a real estate appraiser, He spends his free time following me all over the web.

This comes from his website, "JSO Valuation Group, Ltd. was founded in 1989 by John O’Dwyer, President. John has nearly 25-years of professional real estate experience (where is your resume john, still afraid to produce it. you work for a valuation group for 25 years? now where is your Real Estate Experience) He is a graduate from the University of Dublin, ( Yes folks that is Dublin Ireland, that tiny little brokeass-bankrupt island over there across the pond.) Trinity College 1984, majoring in real estate finance, town planning and economics ( We searched their website and could not find an offering for a real estate degree.) His experience began working as a senior appraiser in New York (1984-1987) and then as a senior loan appraiser in Chicago (1987-1989) (Now come on you disgusting fraud you graduated one day and the next you were a senior appraiser in New York, it must have been for a MAI Firm.) In 1989, John started his own appraisal company, JSO Valuation Group, Ltd. (Pretty good with at most 5 years of appraisal practice.)"

To cut to the chase john o’dwyer is a perfect example of what the appraisal institute - mai represents. A cluster of incopentent frauds. Rest assured he will be in the first chapter if not on the first page.

LIT john

John O'Dwyer, MAI, MRICSRest my case..... there is nothing more to say!

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification


The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

A WORD OF CAUTION: When selecting an Appraiser, Consultant, or Expert please pay close attention to his Resume/CV

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

August 25, 2011

Ann O'Rourke, AI, Appraisal Institute, MAI, Promoutes Colusion between Appraisers and Agents

Ann O'Rourke, AI, Appraisal Institute, MAI, Promoutes Colusion between Appraisers and Agents

10 Strategies For Improving Your Chances of Getting a Fair Appraisal

Here's a quote:

"2. Supply all potentially relevant data. "Basically, you can provide almost anything that you can think of that is going to support the value of the house," Mitchell said. This can include information on the market and absorptions as well as property specifications, home plans, and product details for the home or project in question. You may also want to give the appraiser copies of recent HUD-1 statements if they aren't in the land records yet or examples of recently executed contracts. Allen W. Gardiner, who provided the appraiser perspective on the NAHB/Builder Partnerships webinar, agreed. "One of the biggest mistakes I find is that builders hide data," said Gardiner, who is vice president of residential at Jackson Claborn, a Plano, Texas-based real estate consulting and appraisal firm. "I would encourage you to provide all relevant data. If it was a low sale, let [the appraiser] know and explain how it is different from the others."

My comment: this article was written for home builders but I have been telling sales people about some of this for many years. It is particularly useful today when many appraisals are done through AMCs with low fees, fast turnaround, and out of the area appraisers. When an agent tells me that she "Doesn't want to do the appraisers job", I say "the appraiser gets $350 and you get how much if your deal closes"? (Ann O'Rourke)


click here to read
http://www.builderonline.com/business/10-strategies-for-improving-your-chances-of-getting-a-fair-appraisal.aspx

------------------------------------------------

How to Prevent a Low Appraisal - 9 tips

Here's a quote:

"5. Notes. Go through each individual comparable listing and write notes that compare it to the subject property. For instance, on my most recent appraisal, the specific property had a significant amount of upgraded features. So on each comparable I went through and wrote things like, "Paints need updating, subj. prop. is move in ready," "subj. prop. has upgraded kitchen or bathroom, this does not," or things like "subj. prop. has new, laminate flooring throughout the house, this comp has carpet throughout." Dates of installs, quality of material, etc. Write whatever you can."

"7. Give the appraiser what they ask for: If the appraiser asks for the RPA (Residential Purchase Agreement), send it to them. Don't forget. If they ask for the permits, get the permits and give the permits to the appraiser. I was recently asked for an RPA at an appraisal. Since I use DropBox on my iPhone and iPad, I immediately emailed the documents to the appraiser and he had them before the appraisal was over."

My comments: I always do this when meeting an agent for a relocation appraisal. Then I confirm with the listing agent on the sale. I like to call the listing agent to find out the "story" behind the sale. Whenever I give a presentation to real estate agents I always include tips on how to work with the appraiser. (Ann O'Rourke)

click here to read more
http://kevinpaffrath.com/how-to-prevent-a-low-appraisal


August 23, 2011

rE How the Appraisal Institute - mai Destroid the Real Estate Industry

From: Michael J. Martin [mailto:mjmartin@martinpropertyresearch.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 7:16 PM
To: harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net
Subject: re: after the horse is out

rE How the Appraisal Institute - mai Destroid the Real Estate Industry

of the barn............

after the horse is out of the barn, dumb ranchers shut the doors.............

Michael J. Martin, CFA, MAI

President
Martin Property Research, Inc.

1540 South Holly Street, Suite 4
Denver, CO 80222

Phone (303) 768-8366

Fax (303) 484-2421



Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification


The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

A WORD OF CAUTION: When selecting an Appraiser, Consultant, or Expert please pay close attention to his Resume/CV

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

I got my start, I remember that MAI was described to me as meaning "Made As Instructed" and

John FergusonThere are good and bad apples in any profession but being an appraiser I have seen a lot of bad appraisers both MAI and SRA. In the 80's, when I got my start, I remember that MAI was described to me as meaning "Made As Instructed" and most of the appraisers getting their ass chewed were the MAI appraisers. In California in the 90's we had our own crisis with Mello Roos Bonds and guess who did the bogus appraisals on those...yup MAI appraisers exclusivly. In the current crisis I know of some SRA appraisers that should be in prison for their part in approving fraudulent appraisals and getting in bed with the banks sales departments. On the AI itself I would like to know how it has helped us as a group, only a small percentage of appraisers belong to that organization. I think at one time they might have had some clout but how effective can an organization really be when they are almost broke? I agree with Bill on the book by Bethany Mclean and Joe it is awesome;-) http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=24243343&authType=name&authToken=504a&trk=anet_mfeed_profile

DIANE DiBERNARDO, Managing Director

DIANE DiBERNARDO, Managing Director

Diane DiBernardo brings an impressive spectrum of experience to the Argianas team with almost 20 years as a commercial real estate appraiser. Joining the Argianas team in 2010, Diane is responsible for training, reviewing and coordinating appraisal assignments for certain clients. She is an expert in ARGUS discounted cash flow software.

Diane's extensive experience includes the valuation of fee simple, leased fee and leasehold interests for a wide range of purposes including bank financing, internal asset management, estate planning, and litigation support. Her assignments have included all property types throughout the Midwest including existing and proposed single and multi-tenant office, retail, industrial and residential developments. Diane's familiarity with real estate income analysis is apparent in her appraisal work involving downtown office buildings, community retail centers, and entire residential subdivisions. Special purpose valuation and/or consulting assignments have included easements, billboard signage, self-storage facilities, barge terminals, hotels, golf courses, automotive service stations, and car washes. She is also familiar with the analysis of affordable and low-income housing with special financing and/or income tax credits.

On the road to obtaining the MAI designation, Diane has completed all three levels of appraisal experience which has been formally reviewed and accepted by the Appraisal Institute. She has successfully completed all the necessary coursework and the 16-hour comprehensive exam. With only the demonstration appraisal report remaining, Diane is expected to receive the coveted MAI designation in 2012.

Education
Diane earned her Bachelor Degree in Management from Northeastern Illinois University. She continues her education through various classes and seminars offered by the Appraisal Institute.

Professional Affiliations
Diane is an Associate Member of the Appraisal Institute and a Certified General Real Estate Appraiser in the State of Illinois.

NOW THIS IS HOW UNEDUCATED THESE FOLKS ARE: Diane DiBernardo • "Why would you post this nonsense on the Appraisal Institute's group page? I don't have time to repute every point, but how long do you think a degree in Real Estate has been available? You're showing your age, kid." SHE ACTS LIKE A DEGREE IN REAL ESTATE IS SOMETHING NEW, I GOT MY DEGREE IN 1979 FROM CSULA, AND STARTED THE PROGRAM IN 1975. SHE GOT A DEGREE IN MANAGEMENT AND PROFESS TO BE AN APPRAISER.

August 21, 2011

Sara W. Stephens mai, Appraisal Institute

Sara W. Stephens mai

SaraStephens_150x150.jpg

2011/2012 President, Appraisal Institute

"Stephens graduated magna cum laude from the University of Arkansas at Little Rock with a degree in mathematics and English. She has a master’s degree from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville, where she also completed some post-graduate work. She taught calculus, advanced trigonometry and algebra in the Little Rock Public School District and at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock.

She is the owner and principal of Richard A. Stephens and Associates, the oldest appraisal firm in Little Rock. Along with her business partner and husband, Richard A. Stephens, MAI, SRA,(NEPITISUM) she maintains a practice offering a broad scope of services, specializing in eminent domain, litigation support and real estate tax appeal.

Stephens is one of eight members of the American Society of Real Estate Counselors in Arkansas, and the only woman invited to membership in Arkansas."

lET'S TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT HER BACKGROUND, PLEASE. SHE REPRESENTS "25,000" REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS WITH THIS BACKGROUND you gotta be kidding me. SHE LIKE ALL THE REST ARE A BUNCH OF FRAUDS AND CROOKS! BEWARE of the MAI-APPRAISAL INSTITUTE.

Sara W. Stephens mai, Appraisal Institute

August 20, 2011

Is it any wonder? Look at her resume. Sara W. Stephens, MAI-Appraisal Institute

Is it any wonder? Look at her resume. MAI-Appraisal Institute


Member_Image 
Sara W. Stephens, MAI
Richard A. Stephens & Assoc., Inc.
President
Regions Center
400 West Capitol, Suite 1222
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 372-7513
Fax: (501) 372-7535
Cell: (501) 944-6744
swstephens@prodigy.net
Standards & Ethics Education Completed
Accepts Fee Assignments (more info)




Primary Market Area
State of Arkansas with ephasis on the Little Rock/North Little Rock MSA, particularly Pulaski, Perry, Lonoke, White, Faulkner and Jefferson Counties

Secondary Market Area
Northeast, Northwest, Southeast and Southwest Arkansas

I have been asked, by Realtors and Realist, in the past what can we do? SUPPORT PASSAGE OF THIS BILL AND GET RID OF THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE-MAI.

I have been asked, by Realtors and Realist, in the past what can we do? SUPPORT PASSAGE OF THIS BILL AND GET RID OF THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE-MAI.

(2) REALISTIC MARKET BASED APPRAISALS-

        (A) VALUATION STANDARD- The appropriate Federal banking agency shall require that entities used by financial institutions to assess the value of collateral, with respect to a real estate loan, associated with any viable project in such institution's lending portfolio utilize an as completed valuation to make such an assessment.

        (B) ARMS LENGTH TRANSACTIONS- The appropriate Federal banking agency shall require that entities used by financial institutions to assess or review underwriting standards and collateral values for real estate loans made by such institutions after the date of the enactment of this Act use comparable sales involving arms length transactions to make such an assessment or review.

Wanna know Why you cannot get a SALE TO CLOSE? From the Mouth of the Appraisal Institute-President

Wanna know Why you cannot get a SALE TO CLOSE? From the Mouth of the Appraisal Institute-President

Wanna know Why you cannot get a SALE TO CLOSE?From the Mouth of the Appraisal Institute-President

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.1755.IH:

C. Appraisers should be allowed to analyze all sales in a market, and their judgment and expertise

should be respected

In 2011, four bills were introduced in state legislatures (Illinois, Maryland, Missouri, and Nevada), and one bill was

introduced in Congress and referred to this Committee, to inappropriately legislate the appraisal process. Each

proposal would prohibit the use of distressed sales, such as foreclosure sales or short sales, as comparables in

an appraisal of a parcel of real property. While we sympathize with the plight of those in today’s real estate

market, we strongly oppose such bills, for they will only contribute to an asset bubble and place lenders at great

risk.

It seems reasonable to assume that distressed sales should not form the basis for market value opinions. But, in

some markets, they are such heavy weights on value that they must be considered along with appropriate

adjustments. Distressed sales such as foreclosure sales and short sales are common in a declining market.

Depending on the severity of the local market downturn, some, many, or even all sales that occur do so under

distressed conditions. Appraisers cannot categorically discount foreclosures and short sales as potential

comparable data in the sales comparison approach. However, due to differences between their conditions of sale

and the conditions outlined in the market value definition they might not be usable as market information.

Foreclosures and short sales usually do not meet the conditions outlined in the definition of market value. A short

sale or a sale of a property that occurred prior to a foreclosure might have involved atypical seller motivations

(e.g., a highly motivated seller). A sale of a bank-owned property might have involved typical motivations, so the

fact that it was a foreclosed property would not render it ineligible as meaningful comparable data that should be

considered in developing a credible appraisal. However, if the foreclosed property was sold without a typical

marketing program, or if it had become stigmatized as a foreclosure, it might need to be adjusted if used as

comparable evidence of value. Further, some foreclosed properties are in inferior condition, so adjustments for

physical condition may be needed.

As is always the case in selecting sales to use as comparable market information, appraisers must investigate the

circumstances of each transaction, including whether atypical motivations or sales concessions were involved,

the property was exposed on the market for a typical amount of time, the marketing program was typical, or

whether the property condition was compromised. Adjustments might need to be made for these circumstances.

When it is necessary to use a distressed sale as evidence of value, the appraiser must carefully analyze the

Testimony of Appraisal Institute President-Elect Sara Stephens, MAI, CRE

July 13, 2011

current local market to determine if an adjustment for conditions of sale is needed. If no adjustment is warranted,

the lack of adjustment should be explained.

Physical condition and conditions of sale are two distinctly different factors that must be considered separately.

They may be related to some degree in a distressed market, but not necessarily. An appraiser must not assume,

for example, that a property was in inferior condition simply because it was a foreclosure. The level of

investigation needed to meet the requirement for sufficient diligence is generally more than is needed in nondistressed

market situations. Further, supporting such adjustments can be particularly challenging when there are

few current transactions to analyze. Competency in performing such investigation and analysis is essential, which

is why we believe the best and most productive way to alleviate concerns about appraisals in complex markets is

to ensure that highly qualified appraisers– particularly those with advanced training, peer review, and competency

exams – are used by lenders and their agents.

Further, under federal and state law, appraisers are required to follow the Uniform Standards of Professional

Appraisal Practice (USPAP). USPAP Standards Rule 1-4(a) requires that appraisers "must analyze such

comparable sales data as are available." This means all sales, including foreclosures and short sales. In some

markets, there are so many distressed sales that they are the market and must be considered. When there is a

glut of distress sales in the marketplace, and those properties are truly comparable to the subject, it would be

misleading not to use them as part (or in some cases all) of the basis for a value conclusion.

USPAP further states that, "When compliance with USPAP is required by Federal law or regulation, no part of

USPAP can be voided by a law or regulation of a state or local jurisdiction."

As such, we urge that this Committee refrain from legislating the appraisal process and refrain from advancing the

appraisal provisions of H.R. 1755, as introduced.

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume:

http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog:http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

A WORD OF CAUTION: When selecting an Appraiser, Consultant, or Expert please pay close attention to his Resume/CV

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

August 13, 2011

Tim Bradley, mai, member of the appraisal institute, Jackson Hole Commercial Real Estate , Lier and Crook

Tim Bradley, mai, member of the appraisal institute, Jackson Hole Commercial Real Estate Lier and Crook

"In a sign of the times, the building was recently posted for foreclosure. The owners listed the building for $6,975,000 early this year, and the price has now dropped to $5,400,000." http://activerain.com/blogsview/1360304/jackson-hole-15-e-deloney-jackson-drug-building

"Thanks all for stopping by! Here's an update...the building ultimately sold for $4,500,000!

Lynn: I know. I used to live just a few blocks from the old theater on Greenville Avenue. Loved that neighborhood."

August 02, 2011

Appraisal Institute President calls for Collaboration between Real Estate Agents and Appraisers

THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY IS CALLING FOR APPRAISER INDEPENDENCE. NOT THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE.

"As such, there must be an increased emphasis on collaboration and data sharing between builders, loan originators, lenders, real estate agents, appraisers and all other parties involved in residential real estate transactions. " http://www.scotsmanguide.com/default.asp?ID=4699&part=1

BY:

geovisit();<img src="http://visit.webhosting.yahoo.com/visit.gif?us1305930940" alt="setstats" border="0" width="1" height="1">

April 13, 2011

Entire Deduction Disallowed Due to Numerous Appraisal Failures

Entire Deduction Disallowed Due to Numerous Appraisal Failures

In Boltar v. Commissioner 136 T.C. No. 14 (2011) the Court excluded the developer partnership’s experts’ appraisal as unreliable and irrelevant. The Court sustained the IRS allowance of only $42,400 out of $3,245,000 claimed as a charitable contribution deduction on the partnership return of Boltar, L.L.C. (Boltar) for a conservation easement on 8 land-locked acres in Indiana. Boltar’s experts failed to apply the correct legal standard by failing to determine the value of the donated easement by the before and after valuation method, failed to value contiguous parcels owned by a partnership, and assumed development that was not feasible on the subject property. The Court specifically stated that the appraiser qualifications were not in question. What motivated the Court to reject Boltar’s appraisals was the multiple failures and abuses in the appraisal methodology as well as significant factual errors affecting value. The Court stated, “The problem is created by their willingness to use their resumes and their skills to advocate the position of the party who employs them without regard to objective and relevant facts, contrary to their professional obligations.” And later, “…we need not blindly admit absurd expert opinions.” And finally, ” In addition, the cottage industry of experts who function primarily in the market for tax benefits should be discouraged.” At least from the context of the decision, the Court appears to be directing the last comment at those who enable abusive appraisals and tax schemes. Learn more by visiting http://taxtrials.com/, then click on Boltar. Note that this site has many tax opinions available.


July 26, 2010

The Appraisal Institute shall be suspended as an Appraisal Sponsor effective September 15,

1155 15th Street, NW, Suite 1111
Washington, DC 20005
T 202.347.7722
F 202.347.7727
STATEMENT TO
THE SPONSORING ORGANIZATIONS OF
THE APPRAISAL FOUNDATION
The Board of Trustees of The Appraisal Foundation met in open session on Tuesday, June 15, 2010 to hear allegations that the Appraisal Institute had engaged in conduct detrimental to the interests of The Appraisal Foundation. The Board then went into Executive Session to deliberate the matter and subsequently recessed the meeting prior to the completion of its agenda. The Board reconvened on Monday, July 12, 2010 to
complete its work and we want to advise you of the actions taken by the Board of Trustees.
The following resolutions of the Board of Trustees were adopted by the required two-thirds majority as set forth in the Foundation Bylaws:

RESOLUTION #1
RESOLVED, that upon consideration of the information and materials presented to the Board of Trustees with respect to the conduct of the Appraisal Institute related to an amendment to Title XI, namely, “to maintain the independence of the Appraisal Standards and Appraiser Qualifications Boards and to avoid potential conflicts of interest, the Appraisal Foundation shall not directly or indirectly offer or sponsor any qualifying or continuing education courses for certified or licensed real estate appraisers beyond the National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice course specifically required for licensure and certification” The Board of Trustees has concluded that the Appraisal Institute engaged in conduct materially and seriously prejudicial to the purposes and interests of the Foundation;

RESOLUTION #2
RESOLVED, that as a result of engaging in such conduct, the Appraisal Institute shall be sanctioned as follows:

1) The Appraisal Institute shall be suspended as an Appraisal Sponsor effective September 15, 2010 and ending on April 15, 2011;

2) Permission by The Appraisal Foundation to the Appraisal Institute to reproduce the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) without charge and (b) its discount on the purchase price of USPAP shall be revoked for a period commencing September 15, 2010 and ending on July 1, 2012;

Statement to The Sponsoring Organizations

Page Two

RESOLUTION #3
RESOLVED, The Chair of The Appraisal Foundation shall promptly appoint a task force comprised of not less than three nor more than five members from the Board of Trustees to liaison with the Appraisal Institute during the period of suspension, or for such longer period as the Chair may determine, for the purpose of rehabilitating the relationship of the Appraisal Institute with The Appraisal Foundation as an Appraisal Sponsor.

The bylaws of The Appraisal Foundation outline a process for Sponsors who are about to be expelled or suspended from the Foundation to address the Board of Trustees. Section 5.04 (c) (ii) states:

“The Sponsor shall be given an opportunity to be heard (either orally or in
writing at the election of the Sponsor) not fewer than ten (10) days prior to the
effective date of any proposed suspension or expulsion. If requested by a
Sponsor, a hearing shall be held by the Board of Trustees to determine whether
the suspension or expulsion should take place. If a written statement is
submitted by the Sponsor, such written statement shall be considered by the
Board of Trustees prior to determining whether the suspension or expulsion
should take place.”

June 25, 2010

Swing LOW sweet TIMOTHY (LOWE,) MAI, appraisal institute

Posted by cochise on June 25, 2010 at 19:12:09: http://www.hwforums.com/2191/messages/746.html

Swing LOW sweet TIMOTHY (LOWE,) MAI, appraisal institute

"TIMOTHY LOWE, MAI, CRE, FRICS
WARONZOF ASSOCIATES, INC.
Principal
timothy lowe
As Principal with Waronzof, Mr. Lowe is responsible for
directing real estate consulting and valuation engagements
including strategy and best practice analyses, market and
highest & best use studies, market value and fair compensation
appraisals; acquisition due diligence; economic feasibility
analysis; and advanced financial analyses for large-scale project
development. Mr. Lowe’s practice includes emphasis in
litigation, investment analysis and counseling. His experience
includes appraisal and consulting engagements across the
continental United States, Alaska and Hawaii, Canada and
Argentina, and includes such notable properties and projects as
the West Edmonton Mall (Edmonton), South Coast Plaza
Shopping Center (Costa Mesa), AT&T Park (home to the San
Francisco Giants), Belmont Learning Center (Los Angeles), the
Kapolei City development in Hawaii, the Tren de la Costa
project in Buenos Aires, a 5 million acre natural resource
portfolio in Washington State, Ambassador College (Pasadena)
redevelopment, Two Wall Street (New York), Boeing Field
(Seattle), the Skywalker Ranch facility of director George Lucas
(San Francisco), the three million square foot Air Force Plant #19
(San Diego), the 40 mile long Peninsula Commute Rail Corridor
(San Francisco to San Jose), and the 4,000 acre Girdwood
Development & Disposal Plan project (Anchorage). Mr. Lowe is
a member of the Green Building Finance Consortium, an
industry group working to establish underwriting and valuation
guidelines for sustainable buildings.
Prior to founding Waronzof, Mr. Lowe was a Director in the Real
Estate Consulting and Litigation Practice with Deloitte & Touche
in Los Angeles, and earlier a Vice President and Chief Appraiser
with Arthur Gimmy International in San Francisco. He began
his career as an appraiser and consultant in Anchorage. Mr.
Lowe has been accepted as an expert witness in state and federal
courts in the areas of real estate and going concern valuation,
project feasibility and plan feasibility. Mr. Lowe is a designated
member of the Appraisal Institute (MAI), a member of The
Counselors of Real Estate (CRE) and a Fellow of the Royal
Institute of Chartered Surveyors (FRICS). Additionally Mr.
Lowe is an associate member of the Urban Land Institute and a
member of Lambda Alpha, the Land Economics Society."

I SEASE TO BE AMAIZED! HE DID ALL THIS, BUT WHERE ARE HIS QUALIFICATIONS? sWING lOW PLEASE COME CLEAN WHERE ARE YOUR QUALIFICATIONS?

June 09, 2010

Announcement from USPAP, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

Announcement from USPAP, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice
I would like to ask you to forward this invite for the USPAP group on LinkedIn to Appraisers and other users of Appraisal Services that you believe may benefit from being a member and may provide productive discussion.

Please FORWARD this invitation to others to become a part of the USPAP, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Group on LinkedIn. To find us on LinkedIn they can use this link http://www.linkedin.com/groupRegistration?gid=1873048

We now have 1,158 members now and growing. Our members include more AQB Certified USPAP Instructors than any group I am aware of, with the exception of The Appraisal Foundation itself. We also have multiple people in leadership from The Appraisal Foundation, the Appraisal Section of NAR, NAIFA, AI, ASA, FannieMae, Freddie Mac and numerous regulatory Appraisers and investigatory Appraisers, truly a unique mix. In addition to those there are many other Appraisers, lenders, AMC representatives, Appraisal school representatives and others with an interest in USPAP and what it is we do.

We welcome your participation and comments, so we might learn from you and share with you our collective knowledge and experiences.

Please take the next step and forward this invitation.

Regards,

Don

Donald J. Martin, SCRP, RAA, GAA, CDEI
Appraising Since 1977
Residential, Agricultural, Commercial & Industrial Appraisers
AQB Certified USPAP Instructor
Certified Distance Education Instructor
ERC Certified
FHA/HUD Certified
VA Fee Panel
IL Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Expires 09/30/11
IN Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Expires 06/30/12
WI Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Expires 12/14/11

March 28, 2010

Pier Review of Office Appraisal by A. Brennon Chadwick, III, mai

Pier Review of Office Appraisal by A. Brennon Chadwick, III, mai

http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&gid=2103328&discussionID=16340384&goback=%2Eanh_2103328

We will be discussing the many errors in this appraisal. Please participate and show us how smart you are. I will be making numerious comments as we proceed. Thanks!

http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/files/02A_Jacksonville_Appraisal.pdf

February 27, 2010

Wayne Foss, mai appraisal

Cochise007
Another good example of why the commercial appraisal business is so skrewed up http://www.hwforums.com/2191/messages/638.html Wayne Foss, mai appraisal

The Harris Company, REA/C, http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

January 28, 2010

Sue the Appraisal Institute, MAI, SRA, SRPA

Sue the Appraisal Institute, MAI, SRA, SRPA, They make the following claims and typically produce a shody product, see: http://www.hwforums.com/2191/ They claim to have "the knowledge and experience to make sound 'real estate decisions.'" Hell! they cannot even get the value right now they want you to think that they are qualified real estate consultants. Appraisers usually carry E&O insurance of up to Two Million Dollars, this may not seem like much but the Appraisal Institute has Deep Pockets, but you had better file early. I feel the best way to get rid of these frauds is to sue them out of existence. Please contact us for a free MAI, SRPA, SRA, appraiser review.

"Choose an Appraiser with the MAI, SRA or SRPA Designation

In today’s turbulent real estate market, you want a professional with the knowledge and experience to make sound real estate decisions. When you see the MAI, SRA or SRPA designation, you can rest assured you are making the right choice.

All Appraisal Institute members holding the MAI, SRA or SRPA designation are required to:

  • Complete rigorous education requirements, submit extensive specialized appraisal experience, demonstrate appraisal report writing abilities and potentially pass a comprehensive examination. All requirements to obtain the MAI, SRA or SRPA designations are significantly above the state and federal requirements.

  • Conduct his or her professional activities in accordance with the Appraisal Institute’s Code of Professional Ethics and are subject to a peer review process, which enforces the Code of Professional Ethics.

  • Adhere to strict continuing education requirements to ensure they are up-to-date with the evolving real estate field.

  • In addition, the Appraisal Institute’s MAI, SRA and SRPA designations have long been recognized by courts of law, government agencies, financial institutions and investors as marks of excellence in the field of real estate valuation and analysis. "

January 08, 2010

MADE AS INSTRUCTED APPRAISAL BROUGHT TO YOU BY JOHN R PEXTON (mai, APPRAISAL INSTITUTE, ASSOCIATE)

MADE AS INSTRUCTED APPRAISAL BROUGHT TO YOU BY JOHN R PEXTON (mai, APPRAISAL INSTITUTE, ASSOCIATE)

The asking price for the ranch at this time was $7.3 million. Court records go on to state that on Aug. 12, 2005, after it became clear the military was seeking an $8 million appropriation to purchase the ranch, Grommet had Newman write a letter to the guard stating that the new listing price was $7.7 million for the entire ranch.

Two appraisers - both certified appraisers in the State of Wyoming - were hired by the military to evaluate the ranch. Jim Hastings appraised the ranch at $7.5 million while John Pexton (mai, appraisal institute, associate) appraised the ranch at $7.95 million.
http://www.pcrecordtimes.com/v2_news_articles.php?heading=0&page=72&story_id=1432

John R. Pexton (MAI, APPRAISAL INSTITUTE, ASSOCIATE)
Saddleback Appraisals
Owner
P.O. Box 30
107 North 6th Street
Douglas WY 82633
(307) 358-4932
Accepts Fee Assignments (more info)

November 15, 2009

Appraisal Adjustments, Curtis-Rosenthal, MAI, Appraisal Institute:

Appraisal Adjustments, Curtis-Rosenthal, MAI, Appraisal Institute: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/files/Curtis_Rosenthal.pdf

August 21, 2007

AI, Appraisal Institute, MAI, and Others Conspire to Influence public policy.

AI, Appraisal Institute, MAI, and Others Conspire to Influence public policy.

"This year we are proud to be joined by NAIFA because the more we can speak as a unified profession, the more success we will have in influencing public policy."


"Legislators and government officials will hear a unified voice from the real estate appraisal profession during 2007, thanks to an agreement signed by the four largest appraisal organizations in the United States.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Appraisers+on+same+page+in+Washington-a0161921774

Follow Ups:

Appraisers on same page in Washington.


Ads by GoogleCertified Appraisal Lic.
Become a Certified Residential Appraiser. Online Accredited Course
Appraisal.RealEstateLicense.com FHA Certified Appraisers
FHA Approved, 48 Hr Turn Time Covering the Greater SF Bay Area
www.sfbayappraisal.net Real Estate Appraisal
Enter Your Zip Code & Connect To Pre-Screened Real Estate Appraisers
www.ServiceMagic.com


Link to this page
<a href="http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Appraisers+on+same+page+in+Washington-a0161921774">Appraisers on same page in Washington.</a>

Legislators and government officials will hear a unified voice from the real estate appraisal Real estate appraisal

An estimate of the value of property using various methods.
profession during 2007, thanks to an agreement signed by the four largest appraisal organizations in the United States.

The Appraisal Institute, the American Society of Appraisers (ASA Asa (ā`sə), in the Bible, king of Judah, son and successor of Abijah. He was a good king, zealous in his extirpation of idols. When Baasha of Israel took Ramah (a few miles N of Jerusalem), Asa bought the help of Benhadad of Damascus and ), the American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers (ASFMRA), and the National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers (NAIFA NAIFA National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (formerly NALU)
NAIFA National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers
NAIFA Nevada Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors
) have signed an agreement that will enable the organizations to work cooperatively in the area of government relations.

Ads by GoogleCalifornia Appraisers
State Certified - 24hr Turnaround Credit cards. Long Beach,California
www.avaluecorp.com Residential Appraisers
Free Estimates From Pre-Screened Residential Appraisers In Your Area
www.HomeBlue.com/Appraisers

Under the agreement, the Washington, D.C. Office of the Appraisal Institute will be responsible for monitoring proposed real estate legislation and will keep members of all four organizations informed of relevant federal and state regulatory real estate issues.

"For the past few years, the Appraisal Institute has worked successfully with the ASA and ASFMRA in advocating for issues that are important to our members," said Don Kelly, the Appraisal Institute's chief external relations officer. "This year we are proud to be joined by NAIFA because the more we can speak as a unified profession, the more success we will have in influencing public policy."

The legislative issues and activities the appraisal organizations will pursue during 2007 include: Achieving appraisal licensing reform to ensure greater professionalism; Combating mortgage fraud by working with Congress and other organizations on solutions to the deficient regulatory structure for the appraisal and lending communities; Supporting appraiser independence as a consumer benefit; Promoting professional appraisers as a resource for a wide array of real estate concerns.

"The issues of mortgage fraud and predatory lending are likely to be near the top of the agenda for several Congressional committees," noted Bill Garber, director of Government Affairs for the Appraisal Institute. "It's important that the top real estate appraisal organizations speak with a unified voice to help enact change."

The Appraisal Institute represents more than 21,000 members worldwide. Members may hold the prestigious MAI MAI Mail (File Name Extension)
MAI Multilateral Agreement on Investment
MAI Maius (Latin: May)
MAI Ministerul Administratiei si Internelor (Romanian)
, SRPA SRPA Senior Real Property Appraiser (Appraisal Institute)
SRPA Snake River Plain Aquifer
SRPA Sala de Recuperação Pós-anestésica
SRPA Special Registration Plate Account (license plate fund, North Carolina)
and SRA SrA
abbr.
senior airman
designations. Appraisal Institute members adhere to a strictly enforced Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.

The American Society of Appraisers is an organization of appraisal professionals and others interested in the appraisal profession.

The American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers is a professionally trained group of farm managers, rural appraisers, review appraisers and accredited accredited

recognition by an appropriate authority that the performance of a particular institution has satisfied a prestated set of criteria.


accredited herds
cattle herds which have achieved a low level of reactors to, e.g. agricultural consultants capable of providing expert guidance and assistance to farmland owners, farmers, and other groups which have caretaking responsibilities for farm lands and rural properties.

The National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers is a nonprofit professional association of real estate appraisers.

agricultural consultants capable of providing expert guidance and assistance to farmland owners, farmers, and other groups which have caretaking responsibilities for farm lands and rural properties. The National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers is a nonprofit professional association of real estate appraisers.

August 20, 2007

Are predetermined Appraisal ADJUSTMENTS Legal/Ethical?

Are predetermined Appraisal ADJUSTMENTS Legal/Ethical? Please see attached
Predetermined adjustments provided by
Curtis - Rosenthal, Inc. (MAI Appraiser Los
Angeles) LLC. an MAI Firm. You be the judge and get back with us or call them for this
years update. If your property was acquired by the Los Angeles World Airport (LAWA) you
had better read this!

 

 

[ Yahoo! ] options

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! 

Man, it seems as if I have been fighting all my life.  But then maybe that is what life is all about, and nomatter what your occupation or lifestyle it will and should continue untill the end. 

At this time of the year I like to think back and assess my position, which never seems to change by the way.  This year I have gone back 4 Years since we initally started publishing this blog.  Respectively I present the following:

Commercial Appraiser - Appraisal Blog, APPRAISAL/CONSULTING SERVICES: LA, Los Angeles, 310.337.1973

A Public Service of The Harris Company, Commercial and Forensic Real Estate Appraisers & Consultants, LA, Los Angeles. For appraisal or other consulting services we can be reached at 310.337.1973, harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net, http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Main

December 21, 2011

"Father Forgive Them (John S. Brenan) For They Know Not What They DO!"

"Father Forgive Them (John S. Brenan) For They Know Not What They DO!"

The following article written by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) is spot-on. It was followed up by communicate from John S. Brenan of the Appraisal Foundation/Institute (forgive me but most times it is hard to tell them apart) which for the most part is rambling and incoherent. Why is it so hard for these imbeciles to understand that in order to measure "MARKET VALUE" YOU NEED "MARKET SALES!!!!!" I have requested a copy or John S. Brenan's resume so that we can get to the bottom of this issue once and for all. http://www.icapweb.com/upload/121311%20NAHB%20Response.pdf He obviously does not understand Real Estate or Real Estate Markets.

Home > Newsroom > Flawed Appraisals Killing Home Sales, Hampering Housing Recovery

Flawed Appraisals Killing

Home Sales, Hampering

Housing Recovery

Normal View

December 8, 2011 - One out of three builders are reporting losing signed sales contracts during the

preceding six months because appraisals on their homes are less than the contract sales price, according to

a recent nationwide survey conducted by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB).

“The inappropriate use of distressed and foreclosed sales as comparables in determining new home values is

needlessly driving down home prices, killing home sales, causing more workers to lose their jobs and

delaying a housing and economic recovery,” said NAHB Chairman Bob Nielsen, a home builder from Reno,

Nev.

Too often, due to faulty appraisal practices, brand new homes with sparkling appliances and interior

upgrades get compared to a distressed property that has been sitting vacant and in disrepair. The result, in

many cases has been that the new house winds up getting appraised at less than the cost of construction.

That is precisely what is occurring in today’s marketplace, according to the NAHB survey, where a full 60

percent of respondents reported they were experiencing appraisals coming in below their contract sales

price.

Of those reporting that they had encountered this problem, 53 percent said the appraisal amount was actually

less than the cost of building the home.

“This is not only unfair and unreasonable, but it perpetuates the cycle of declining home values, drives more

home owners underwater, harms local economic activity and acts as an obstacle to the recovery of the

housing market,” said Nielsen.

These appraisal practices are a major contributing factor to the current acquisition, development and

construction (AD&C) lending crisis that has choked off credit for home builders and threatens to prolong the

current housing downturn.

Falling appraised values for land and subdivisions under development have led some financial institutions to

stop lending to developers and builders, to demand additional equity and even to call performing loans.

Since Sept. 2009, NAHB has held four appraisal summits in Washington with representatives of federal

banking regulators, the appraisal industry, the housing finance industry, the real estate and housing sectors

and others to find solutions that will allow appraisers to develop realistic valuations based on sales that are

truly comparable.

The need to give top priority to addressing the complexity of property valuations in distressed markets and

impediments to the flow of appropriate information on homes between appraisers and interested parties was

discussed during the most recent summit, which occurred on Oct. 19.

“Major reforms in appraisal practices and oversight are needed to ensure that appraisals accurately reflect

true market values and don’t contribute to price volatility or harm aspiring home owners and move-up

buyers,” said Nielsen. “We will continue to work with all stakeholders in this debate to find solutions.”

With the decline in home prices appearing to have ended or be coming to an end in most parts of the country,

resolving the appraisal and credit crunch issues remain a top priority for the association.

NAHB’s latest Improving Markets Index has shown modest signs of improvement in scattered housing

markets where employment is gaining and distressed properties are not as numerous.

New-home construction stands ready to serve as an engine for economic recovery. Building 100 single-family

homes creates more than 300 full-time jobs and provides $8.9 million in federal, state and local tax

revenues.

“Resolving inappropriate appraisal practices and restoring the flow of credit to home builders will not only help

to put America back to work, it will provide badly needed tax revenues that is essential for local governments

to support schools, police and firefighters in communities across the land,” said Nielsen.

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

December 20, 2011

mai Stephen J. Vertin Exposes the appraisal institute ineptitude

"mai Stephen J. Vertin Exposes the appraisal institute ineptitude

THEY (ai, mai, appraisal institute) HAS BEEN IN BUSINESS SINCE DEBACLE I AND ARE JUST NOW GETTING AROUND TO TEACHING THEIR MEMBERS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REAL AND PERSONAL pROPERTY, REDICulious!!! Aparently this course is very similar to all their courses, short on facts and long on theory, i.e. just made up stuff.

Stephen J. Vertin, MAI's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: 203 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2100, Chicago, Illinois
State: Illinois
Professional Status: Certified General Appraiser
Posts: 2,187
DefaultFundamentals of Separating Real and Personal Property

"Last week I took the new AI course Fundamentals of Separating Real and Personal Property from Intangible Business Assets. I did not put this in the educational forum section since it applies heavily to commercial work.

I believe this is the future in AI's development into business valuation. They promise courses will follow. It makes sense since many future businesses will not have real estate and the fact of 2014 changing accounting standards. You would not believe the sentiment that the future of RE appraising is doomed because of existing and coming governmental regulations.

The class was heavy in theory. If you are looking for a calculator class this is not it. It is great for understanding the basics and a must for appraisers doing real estate appraisals with intangible components. I applaud the effort to unite terminology covering some of the most basic issues used in most general practices. A must do in 2012 for those who have not taken it. Further it is required for SBA loans on such properties. The Chicago class last week was the second given."

December 17, 2011

ai, appraisal institute, mai seeks to continue its control over the Appraisal Industry

ai, appraisal institute, mai seeks to continue its control over the Appraisal Industry

" A related provision in the HERA Act requires FHA appraisers to have “demonstrated verifiable education in the appraisal requirement established by FHA1”. "FHA has contended that state certification suffices for this requirement2, and on this point, (ai, mai, appraisal institute) we disagree." http://appraisalinstitute.org/newsadvocacy/downloads/ltrs_tstmny/2011/AI-ASFMRAonFHAStateCertified.pdf

2 According to ML 08-39, “Moreover, FHA has determined that appraisers meeting the AQB criteria, as required by the FHA Appraiser Roster regulations, have “demonstrated verifiable education in the appraisal requirements established by FHA” under the new law.” Available at http://www.appraisal.state.az.us/userfiles/file/12%2008%20FHA%20Mortgagee%20Ltr.pdf

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

appraisal institute, mai, ai IN CYA MODE

appraisal institute, mai, ai. . .

IN CYA MODE

For years we have advocated that Appraisers should not use non-armslength (reo, short sales, listings, and probate) sales transactions to determine "Market Value." This practice has devastated the Real Estate Market. For the same amount of time this practice has been promoted by the appraisal institute, mai, ai, and it's members. The following Guide Note 11 was published in November of this year. It is an obvious attempt to cover their posterior. We encourage Realtors, Bankers, Mortgage Brokers, and HOME OWNERS to up the pressure and proceed with any and all civil actions against the ai, appraisal institute and its members. This "organization" has proven year after year, that their only objective is make their members and clients part of the 1% club.

The Harris Company, REA/C vows to provide our assistants to defeat these frauds and incompetents at the ai, appraisal institute, mai, and its members.

"Comparable Selection

Appraisers must consider all relevant transactions that have occurred in the market area and then determine which of those transactions should be used in the sales comparison analysis to arrive at a credible value opinion for the subject property. The best comps are those that are most similar to the subject property in terms of location, size, condition and other features that buyers and sellers believe make a difference to price. After selecting the best comps, the appraiser adjusts for material differences between each comp and the subject property. The appraiser must analyze each comp to GUIDE NOTE 11 48 Appraisal Institute Guide Notes

ascertain what adjustments are needed. Factors that may require adjustment include atypical buyer/seller motivations and sales concessions.

When the objective of the assignment is market value, ideally each comp selected for use in the sales comparison approach should have sold under the conditions specified in the definition of market value being used. For example, the buyer and seller should have been typically motivated. The seller should not have been under any compulsion to sell, nor the buyer under any compulsion to buy. The marketing effort and exposure time on the market should have been typical for that property type in that market. Payment should have been in cash or terms equivalent to cash; i.e., the seller should not have granted cash or non-cash concessions to bring a sale at the stated price.

When the conditions of the sale do not reflect the conditions outlined in the market value definition, either (1) the appraiser must consider making adjustments for such differences if it is to be used as a comp, or (2) the sale must not be used as a comp.

Distressed Sales as Comparables

Distressed sales such as foreclosure sales and short sales are common in a declining market. Depending on the severity of the local market downturn, some, many, or even all sales that occur do so under distressed conditions.

Appraisers cannot categorically discount foreclosures and short sales as potential comps in the sales comparison approach. However, due to differences between their conditions of sale and the conditions outlined in the market value definition they might not be usable as comps. Foreclosures and short sales usually do not meet the conditions outlined in the definition of market value. A short sale or a sale of a property that occurred prior to a foreclosure might have involved atypical seller motivations (e.g., a highly motivated seller.) A sale of a bank-owned property might have involved typical motivations, so the fact that it was a foreclosed property would not render it ineligible as a comp. However, if the foreclosed property was sold without a typical marketing program, or if it had become stigmatized as a foreclosure, it might need to be adjusted if used as a comp. Further, some foreclosed properties are in inferior condition, so adjustments for physical condition may be needed

As is always the case in selecting sales to use as comparables, appraisers must investigate the circumstances of each transaction, including whether atypical motivations were involved, sales concessions were involved, the property was exposed on the market for a typical amount of time, the marketing program was typical, or the property condition was compromised. Adjustments might need to be made for these circumstances. When it is necessary to use a distressed sale as a comp, the appraiser must carefully analyze the current local market to determine if an adjustment for conditions of sale is needed. If no adjustment is warranted, the lack of adjustment should be explained.

Physical condition and conditions of sale are two distinctly different factors that must be considered separately. They may be related to some degree in a distressed market, but not necessarily. An appraiser must not assume, for example, that a property was in inferior condition simply because it was a foreclosure.

The level of investigation needed to meet the requirement for sufficient diligence is generally more than is needed in non-distressed market situations. Further, supporting such adjustments can be particularly challenging when there are few current transactions to analyze. Competency in performing such investigation and analysis are required."

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

December 15, 2011

Appraisal Institute, mai, sra, Launches Investigation Into Appraisal Fraud

Appraisal Institute, mai, sra, Launches Investigation Into Appraisal Fraud
Richard Hagar wants copies of appraisals

My comment: He sent me this email yesterday.

I’m trying to obtain copies of appraisals, as many as possible from all across the US.

Somewhere in your office, is there an appraisal that you can send me?
These appraisals can be:
• Bad appraisal that should be turned in to the state;
• An appraisal that was performed by someone that was not geographically competent;
• An appraiser that blew the value or failed to follow USPAP or;
• An example of a good appraisal.

I don’t care where it came from, how you obtained it, I just want to have them.

Why? I’m trying to put together a study of appraisals. Did bad appraisals cause a loss, did good appraisals save a bank from collapse.

How many were USPAP compliant and who ordered it (AMC or direct)?
2001-2011 preferable.

So if you have an appraisal that you can send me (PDF, email, regular mail) I’d like to have it.

Richard Hagar SRA
rh@americanappraisals.com
or
7433 SE 27th Street
Mercer Island, WA 98040

comment: FYI, Richard Hagar is an expert on appraisal fraud. And, an excellent speaker and instructor. And, does a lot of work for attorneys. by AnnO'Rorke, mai ai, appraisal institute

November 14, 2011



Professional Liability Lawsuits
Subscribe via Email Email

As receiver for a failed financial institution, the FDIC may sue professionals who played a role in the failure of the institution in order to maximize recoveries. These individuals can include officers and directors, attorneys, accountants, appraisers, brokers, or others. Professional liability claims also include direct claims against insurance carriers such as fidelity bond carriers and title insurance companies.

The FDIC follows the policies adopted by the FDIC Board in 1992, Statement Concerning the Responsibilities of Bank Directors and Officers, which can be found at http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/5000-3300.html#fdic5000statementct, and require Board approval before actions are brought against directors and officers.

Professional liability suits are only pursued if they are both meritorious and cost-effective. Before seeking recoveries from professionals, the FDIC conducts a thorough investigation into the causes of the failure. Most investigations are completed within 18 months from the time the institution is closed. Prior to filing the claim, staff will attempt to settle with the responsible parties. If a settlement cannot be reached, however, a complaint will be filed, typically in federal court.

As receiver, the FDIC has three years for tort claims and six years for breach-of-contract claims to file suit from the time a bank is closed. If state law permits a longer time, the state statute of limitations is followed.

Professionals may be sued for either gross or simple negligence. The Supreme Court has ruled that the FDIC may pursue simple negligence claims against directors and officers if state law permits (Atherton v. FDIC). Federal law preempts state law that insulates directors and officers from gross negligence or worse conduct. Bank directors are allowed to exercise business judgment without incurring legal liability.

Not all bank failures result in Director and Officer (D&O) lawsuits. The FDIC brought claims against directors and officers in 24 percent of the bank failures between 1985 and 1992.

From 1986 through 2009, the FDIC and Resolution Trust Corporation collected $6.2 billion from professional liability claims. Over that same time, they spent $1.5 billion to fund all professional liability claims and investigations. Early in the process of professional liability claims, expenses will often exceed recoveries due to the costs incurred in handling new investigations. Professional liability program recoveries lag expenses by several years until settlements occur and judgments are awarded.

As of November 14, 2011, the FDIC has authorized suits in connection with 37 failed institutions against 340 individuals for D&O liability with damage claims of at least $7.6 billion. This includes 16 filed D&O lawsuits (2 of which have settled) naming 124 former directors and officers. The FDIC also has authorized 23 other lawsuits for fidelity bond, insurance, attorney malpractice, appraiser malpractice, and RMBS claims. In addition, 177 residential mortgage malpractice and fraud lawsuits are pending, consisting of lawsuits filed and inherited.

For additional background on Professional Liability Suits, please see Chapter 11 of "Managing the Crisis: The FDIC and RTC Experience" http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/managing/history1-11.pdf.

Authorized D&O DefendantsDamage Claims ($ millions)*
Authorized through 2010109$2,488.9
January 201110$60.2
February 201111$15.0
March 201128$1,007.9
April 201129$198.2
May 201121$92.7
June 201130$2,895.9
July 201110$54.6
August 201118$33.9
September 201128$375.1
October 201114$125.1
November 201132$217.1
Total340$7,564.6

*Losses typically exceed these amounts and may result in higher damage claims in filed lawsuits. Recovery on these claims is dependent upon available recovery sources, such as insurance and personal assets, and competing claims.

D&O Suits Filed

  1. FDIC as Receiver of IndyMac Bank, F.S.B. v. Van Dellen, et al., Case No. 2:10-cv-04915-DSF-SH (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Filed Jul. 2, 2010).
  2. FDIC as Receiver of Heritage Community Bank v. Saphir, et al., Case No. 1:10-cv-07009 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Filed Nov. 1, 2010).
  3. FDIC as Receiver of 1st Centennial Bank v. Appleton, et al., Case No. 2:11-cv-00476-DDP-PLA (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Filed Jan. 14, 2011).
  4. FDIC as Receiver of Integrity Bank of Alpharetta, GA v. Skow, et al., Case No. 1:11-cv-0111 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Filed Jan. 14, 2011).
  5. FDIC as Receiver of Corn Belt Bank and Trust Company v. Stark, et al., Case Number 3:11-cv-03060-JBM–BGC (U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois Filed Mar. 1, 2011).
  6. FDIC as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank v. Killinger, et al., Case No. 2:11-cv-000459 (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington Filed Mar. 16, 2011).
  7. FDIC as Receiver for Wheatland Bank v. Spangler, et al., Case No. 10-cv-4288 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Filed May 5, 2011).
  8. FDIC as Receiver of IndyMac Bank, F.S.B. v. Perry, Case No. 11-cv-5561-ODW-MRWx (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Filed Jul. 6, 2011).
  9. FDIC as Receiver of Haven Trust Bank v. Briscoe, Case No. 1:11-mi-99999-UNA (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Filed Jul. 14, 2011).
  10. FDIC as Receiver of Michigan Heritage Bank v. Cuttle, Case No.2:11-cv-13422-BAF-MKM (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan Filed Aug. 8, 2011).
  11. FDIC as Receiver of The Columbian Bank and Trust Co. v. McCaffree, Case No. 2:11-cv-02447-JAK-KGS (U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas Filed Aug. 9, 2011).
  12. FDIC as Receiver for Cooperative Bank v. Willetts, Case No. 7:11-cv-00165-BO (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina Filed Aug. 10, 2011).
  13. FDIC as Receiver for Silverton National Bank, N.A. v. Bryan, Case No. 1:11-cv-02790-JEC (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Filed Aug. 22, 2011).
  14. FDIC as Receiver for First National Bank of Nevada v. Dorris, Case No. 11-cv-01652-GMS (U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona Filed Aug. 23, 2011).
  15. FDIC as Receiver for Alpha Bank v. Blackwell, Case No. 11-cv-3423 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Filed Oct. 7, 2011).
  16. FDIC as Receiver for Mutual Bank v. Mahajan, Case No: 1:11-cv-07590 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Filed Oct. 25, 2011).

November 09, 2011

UAD Uniform Appraisal Data

http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/files/Curtis_Rosenthal.pdf

UAD Uniform Appraisal Data

November 07, 2011

Are predetermined Appraisal ADJUSTMENTS Legal/Ethical

Are predetermined Appraisal ADJUSTMENTS Legal/Ethical? Please see attached Predetermined adjustments provided
by
Curtis - Rosenthal, Inc. (MAI Appraiser Los Angeles) LLC. an MAI Firm. You be the judge and get back with us or call
them for this years update. If your property was acquired by the Los Angeles World Airport (LAWA) you had better read
this!

Appraisal Institute and Racial Discrimination,


Posted by Cochise
Commercial Appraiser
http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/files/http___mccoynet.pdf


It appears that discrimination is something that the Appraisal Institute knows a lot about. In fact they use to be called T
he American
Institute of Real Estate Appraisers
until they were sued, for discrimination, by the Federal Government. They then changed their
name to the Appraisal Institute, same pig, different shade of lipstick.
(The MAI Appraiser Standard, Larry A Mc Coy, MAI)
Application Local governments are not immune from proscriptions of Title VIII, and may be sued. United States v Black Jack ...
provides for actions against states and political subdivisions as well as actions against private transactions and practices;
comprehensive purpose of Fair Housing Act)... would be diluted if it were to apply only to actions of private individuals and entities. ...
applies to appraisers of real estate. United States v American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers etc. (1977, ND Ill) 442 F Supp
1072, 24 FR Serv 2d 880, app dismd (CA7 Ill) 590 F2d 242, 48 ALR Fed 657. 42 USCS ? 3604(a, b, d)’

October 26, 2011

RACISM STILL ALIVE AND WELL AT THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE

RACISM STILL ALIVE AND WELL AT THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE

Don't believe it? Check out their latest propaganda. A house organ with 14 pages, 31 photos and several hundred folks. No Blacks! Get the Picture?

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

October 25, 2011

Appraisal Institute Busted for RACISM

Appraisal Institute Busted for RACISM

Appraisal Institute Busted for RACISM

LEXSEE 442 F SUPP 1072

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, THE SOCIETY OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS, THE UNITED STATES LEAGUE OF SAVINGS ASSOCIATIONS, and THE MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, Defendants

No. 76 C 1448

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

442 F. Supp. 1072; 1977 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12760; 24 Fed. R. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 880

 

November 23, 1977

CASE SUMMARY:

 

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Defendants, institute and other organizations and individuals, filed a motion in the court for leave to intervene and oppose a proposed settlement agreement between plaintiff United States and the institute arising from a lawsuit under the Fair Housing Act (Act), 42 U.S.C.S. § 3601 et seq. The settling parties applied for entry of the proposed settlement order, approval of a settlement agreement, and a confidentiality order.

OVERVIEW: The United States filed a lawsuit against the institute and the other organizations pursuant to 42 U.S.C.S. § 3613, to secure relief from alleged violations of the Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The institute's motion to intervene as of right under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2) was before the court. The court denied the institute's motion to intervene, but granted an individual's motion for leave to intervene permissively under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b) solely for the purpose of contesting the legality of the settlement agreement insofar as it infringed his constitutional right to freedom of speech. The court approved the settlement order, the agreement, and the confidentiality order between the United States and the institute. The court found that the United States had stated a claim for relief under the terms of the Act. The court determined that the failure to submit the proposed settlement order to the membership for approval did not evidence inadequacy of representation, in light of the by-laws and a state statute. The court concluded that the institute's entry into the settlement agreement did not amount to a failure to fulfill its duty to represent its members.

OUTCOME: The court denied the institute's motion to intervene and oppose a proposed settlement arising from the United States' lawsuit against the institute and the other organizations and individuals under the Act. The court approved the settlement order, the settlement agreement, and the confidentiality order between the United States and the institute and ordered their immediate entry.

 

JUDGES: [**1] George N. Leighton United States District Judge.

OPINION BY: LEIGHTON

OPINION

[*1076] Memorandum

Before the Honorable George N. Leighton United States District Judge

This cause is before the court on the motion of F. Gregory Opelka and 71 other individuals for leave to intervene and oppose a proposed settlement agreement between plaintiff United States and defendant American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (hereinafter "AIREA" or "Institute"). Also, the settling parties have applied for entry of the proposed settlement order, approval of the settlement agreement and a confidentiality order between the United States and AIREA. For the following reasons, the motion to intervene as of right under Rule 24(a)(2), F.R.Civ.P., is denied; but the court grants Opelka leave to intervene permissively under Rule 24(b), F.R.Civ.P., solely for the purpose of contesting the legality of the settlement agreement insofar as it may infringe his constitutional right to freedom of speech. Further, the settlement order, the agreement, and the confidentiality order between the United States and AIREA are approved; their immediate entry is ordered.

I.

On April 16, 1976, the United States filed [**2] this suit against four organizations: The American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, the Society of Real Estate Appraisers, the United States League of Savings Associations, and the Mortgage Bankers Association of America, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3613, to secure relief from alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601, et seq. [hereinafter the "Fair Housing Act"]. The complaint alleges that since the effective date of the Fair Housing Act, defendants have engaged in unlawful discriminatory practices by promulgating standards which have caused appraisers and lenders to treat race and national origin as negative factors in determining the value of dwellings and in evaluating the soundness of home loans; and by failing to take adequate steps to correct the continuing effect of past discrimination and ensure non-discrimination by appraisers and lenders whose practices are subject to the influence or authority of the four organizations. Defendants' practices, it is alleged, have made dwellings unavailable to persons because of race and national origin; denied home loans to such persons; and have interfered with their [**3] exercise and enjoyment of rights secured by the Fair Housing Act in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a), 3605, and 3617. The United States seeks injunctive and declaratory relief from these alleged violations. Jurisdiction is invoked under 42 U.S.C. § 3613 and 28 U.S.C. § 1345.

After extensive negotiations, which included development of an affirmative action program, 1 the United States and AIREA have agreed not to seek a litigated resolution of their controversy. Instead, they have applied for entry of a settlement order which incorporates a proposed settlement agreement and affirmative action program. The agreement is divided into two parts: (1) the affirmative action program (Pts. I-VI); and (2) a plan for implementation [*1077] of the agreement and resolution of the litigation (Pts. VII-VIII).

1 The affirmative action program is, to a large extent, the product of negotiations between AIREA and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, Office of Voluntary Compliance (hereinafter "OFHEO/OVC").

[**4] In the affirmative action section, it is agreed that AIREA will adopt three fundamental policy statements:

(1) It is improper to base a conclusion or opinion of value upon the premise that the racial, ethnic, or religious homogeneity of the inhabitants of an area or of a property is necessary for maximum value.

(2) Racial, religious or ethnic factors are deemed unreliable predictors of value trends or price variance.

(3) It is improper to base a conclusion or opinion of value, or a conclusion with respect to neighborhood trends, upon stereotyped or biased presumptions relating to race, color, religion, sex or national origin or upon unsupported presumptions relating to the effective age or remaining life of the property being appraised or the life expectancy of the neighborhood in which it is located.

AIREA is to implement these stated general policies through specific changes in its textbook, The Appraisal of Real Estate, through review and, if necessary, prompt revision of its other instructional materials, courses, and seminars to ensure that they reflect the policy statements. Further, AIREA is to prepare, for use in its courses, an educational memorandum [**5] which explains civil rights legislation pertinent to the real estate appraisal profession. It is to develop special seminars for its members and the general public concerning appraisal of real estate and explaining the general policies and educational memorandum. AIREA agrees to add new explanatory comments to Canon 4 of Regulation 10 of its Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct. The comment is to clarify its position with respect to appraisal practices and its commitment to the stated general policies. In addition, it will add to the explanatory comments to Canon 5 a new reporting rule which provides, in part:

All written appraisal reports relating to residential real estate which state that a neighborhood is undergoing decline or is about to undergo decline must contain the specific facts or reasoning upon which the . . . conclusion . . . is based.

A similar provision is made requiring that the specific facts or reasoning upon which similar oral appraisal reports are based must be contained in the appraiser's files. AIREA will issue a new interpretation of Canon 6 which states that it is not improper for an appraiser to permit a government [**6] agency investigating alleged unlawful activity to have access to appraisal reports. The decision to permit or deny such access is reserved to the appraiser. AIREA agrees to maintain a procedure for review of the appraisal reports relating to residential real estate in order to ensure that members and candidates understand the general policies. It will also expand its recruitment and scholarship outreach program which is aimed at acquainting women and minority group members with opportunities in the real estate appraisal profession.

The implementation section of the settlement agreement provides a termination date at which time the parties will petition the court for dismissal of AIREA from the litigation. AIREA is to advise the OFHEO/OVC and the United States of each material step taken to implement the agreement. However, it is provided that no part of the agreement

shall be interpreted to limit AIREA's right to implement its plans or publish or distribute any materials which it has developed [pursuant to the affirmative action plan] without prior approval of Justice.

The United States will, however, be placed on AIREA's mailing list and, subject to the confidentiality [**7] order, will have access to AIREA's files which relate to the settlement obligation. AIREA may, at its sole option and discretion, obtain review and comments of the United States regarding any material it plans to distribute pursuant to the agreement.

The parties shall remain subject to the continuing jurisdiction of the court during the term of the agreement. The agreement is enforceable by court order, should the [*1078] parties disagree as to its interpretation following negotiations attempting to resolve the dispute. The settlement order specifically provides that it and the agreement

[do] not in any way affect any of the defendants to this action other than AIREA and shall not be deemed to limit or prejudice the rights of the United States or any of said other defendants to apply for any relief they deem appropriate whether or not such relief is different than or in addition to the remedies provided for herein.

Similarly, the agreement provides:

Except as expressly provided for herein and in the Settlement Order, this Settlement Agreement does not constitute a determination of the rights of any party to this litigation.

F. Gregory Opelka, [**8] an AIREA member, filed suit in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, against AIREA challenging its power to enter into the settlement agreement. On March 29, 1977, the circuit court issued an order restraining AIREA from executing the documents intended by the United States and AIREA to resolve the controversy between them. On March 31, 1977, this court entered a temporary order restraining Opelka from attacking the settlement agreement in any state or other federal court. The temporary restraining order was converted into a preliminary injunction on April 8, 1977. Shortly thereafter, Opelka moved for leave to intervene as a party defendant in this action.

Opelka's motion alleges that his interest as a member of AIREA is inadequately represented in this action because he and other AIREA members have not been given an opportunity to exercise their right to review and vote on the proposed settlement agreement. The complaint he seeks to file addresses itself solely to the propriety of the settlement. It alleges that the agreement has the effect of binding all AIREA members to its provisions in the practice of their profession and would violate their first amendment rights; [**9] that the governing council exceeded its authority under AIREA by-laws by entering into the agreement; that the agreement constitutes an amendment of the existing code of professional ethics; and that it constitutes a violation of the by-laws in that the agreement amounts to an amendment of the by-laws without proper notice to members. Therefore, Opelka seeks an order compelling AIREA to submit the settlement agreement to its members for their review and restraining AIREA from entering into it, prior to membership approval.

The United States and AIREA assert that Opelka cannot intervene as of right, but have no objection to his intervention, on a permissive basis, for the purpose of contesting the settlement agreement. 2 Opelka and the Society of Real Estate Appraisers (hereinafter "SREA" or "Society") oppose entry of the settlement order and agreement.

2 Both the United States and AIREA devote some attention in their briefs to opposing Opelka's intervention as a full party defendant. However, because Opelka's motion and proposed pleading indicate that he wishes to intervene only for the purpose of opposing the settlement agreement, the court finds intervention as a full party defendant is not proposed nor at issue here. See Rule 24(c), F.R.Civ.P.

[**10] II.

SREA's first, and fundamental, objection is that the court lacks jurisdiction to enter the settlement order because the Fair Housing Act does not apply to appraisers. While the court rejected that contention when it denied SREA's motion to dismiss, the court takes this opportunity to hold that the Fair Housing Act does apply to appraisers of real estate and that this court has jurisdiction over this action under 42 U.S.C. § 3613 and 28 U.S.C. § 1345. And having jurisdiction, it can grant declaratory judgment relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202. SREA's principal argument is that because sections 804(a) and 817 of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a), 3617, do not mention appraisers or the appraisal process, the Act does not reach the activities of appraisers. In pertinent part, these provisions declare:

[*1079] § 3604. Discrimination in sale or rental of housing

[It] shall be unlawful -

(a) To refuse to sell or rent after the making of a bona fide offer, or to refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental of, or otherwise make unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any person because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

§ [**11] 3617. Interference, coercion, or intimidation; enforcement by civil action

It shall be unlawful to coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any person in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his having aided or encouraged any other person in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by section 3603, 3604, 3605, or 3606 of this title. This section may be enforced by appropriate civil action. (Emphasis added.)

It is clear from the plain language of the provisions that appraisers are not exempted from their coverage; both sections are unrestricted with respect to the class of persons subject to their prohibition. The "otherwise make unavailable or deny" language of section 804(a) has been applied to a variety of conduct to prohibit all practices which have the effect of denying dwellings on prohibited grounds. For example, section 804(a) applies to racially exclusionary land use practices by a municipality. United States v. City of Black Jack, Missouri, 508 F.2d 1179 (8th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 422 U.S. 1042, 45 L. Ed. 2d 694, 95 S. Ct. 2656 (1975). It applies to "redlining" [**12] by financial institutions. Laufman v. Oakley Bldg. & Loan Co., 408 F. Supp. 489, 493 (S.D. Ohio 1976). It applies to delaying tactics and discouragement of rental applications used by resident managers and rental agents, and top management and owners who fail to set objective and reviewable procedures for rental applications. United States v. Youritan Construction Co., 370 F. Supp. 643, 648 (N.D.Cal. 1973), aff'd as modified, 509 F.2d 623 (9th Cir. 1975). Finally, it applies to racial "steering". Zuch v. Hussey, 366 F. Supp. 553, 556-57 (E.D. Mich. 1973).

The "or interferes with" language of section 817 has been similarly broadly applied to reach all practices which have the effect of interfering with the exercise of rights under the Act. See, e.g., Smith v. Stechel, 510 F.2d 1162 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. City of Black Jack, Missouri, supra; Laufman v. Oakley Bldg. & Loan Co., supra at 497-98. The Act requires a liberal construction if the statute is to prohibit effectively "all forms of discrimination, sophisticated as well as simple-minded. . . ." Williams v. Matthews Co., 499 F.2d 819, 826 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1027, 42 [**13] L. Ed. 2d 302, 95 S. Ct. 507 (1974). Given a broad interpretation of these provisions, it becomes clear that the United States has stated a claim for relief under their terms. The promulgation of standards which cause appraisers and lenders to treat race and national origin as a negative factor in determining the value of dwellings and in evaluating the soundness of home loans may effectively "make unavailable or deny" a "dwelling" and may "interfere" with persons in the exercise and enjoyment of rights guaranteed by the Act. When such denial or interference occurs as a result of considerations relating to race or national origin, sections 804(a) and 817 are transgressed. 3

3 The court further notes that it has jurisdiction to enter the settlement order and agreement under the teaching of Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 681-82, 90 L. Ed. 939, 66 S. Ct. 773 (1946). As was stated in Grabinger v. Conlisk, 320 F. Supp. 1213, 1217 (N.D. Ill. 1970), aff'd, 455 F.2d 490 (7th Cir. 1972):

When a claim is alleged to arise under the Constitution or laws of the United States, the federal district court must entertain the suit except when the alleged claim appears to be immaterial and made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction or where it is wholly insubstantial and frivolous.

[**14] III.

Absent a statutory right of intervention, Rule 24(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires the applicant to establish three elements as a prerequisite to intervention as of right: (1) an interest in the subject matter of the lawsuit; (2) the potential [*1080] for impairment of that interest; and (3) the inadequate representation of that interest by existing parties. See 3B Moore's Federal Practice, para. 24.09-1[1] (2d ed. 1977); 7A C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure, Civil §§ 1902, 1908 (1972); Comment, Intervention in Government Enforcement Actions, 89 Harv. L. Rev. 1174 (1976). Opelka argues that he has an interest in the entry of the settlement agreement and order which may be impaired by this court's disposition of the matter in that his right to commercial free speech and the economic conditions of his practice may thereby be affected. The gist of his argument is that the settlement agreement and order, if approved by this court, will bar him from utilizing racial and ethnic factors in making appraisals of residential real estate and thereby force him to ignore socioeconomic realities. He also argues that because the agreement [**15] binds all individual AIREA members, those who are jointly designated members of both AIREA and SREA will be placed in the untenable position of either adhering to SREA practices or complying with the settlement order. These arguments misapprehend the "interest" and "practical impairment" requirements of Rule 24(a)(2) as well as the substance and reach of the proposed settlement before the court.

The "interest" requirement of Rule 24(a)(2) has been recognized as "primarily a practical guide to disposing of lawsuits by involving as many apparently concerned persons as is compatible with efficiency and due process." Nuesse v. Camp, 128 U.S. App. D.C. 172, 385 F.2d 694, 700 (1967). The requirement is satisfied by something less than a specific legal or equitable interest in the chose. See, e.g., Cascade Natural Gas Corp. v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 386 U.S. 129, 132-36, 17 L. Ed. 2d 814, 87 S. Ct. 932 (1967); Johnson v. San Francisco Unified School Dist., 500 F.2d 349, 352-53 (9th Cir. 1974); Smuck v. Hobson, 132 U.S.App.D.C. 372, 408 F.2d 175 (1969); Nuesse v. Camp, supra. As one court has observed:

If barriers are needed to limit extension of the right [**16] to intervene, the criteria of practical harm to the applicant and the adequacy of representation by others are better suited to the task. Smuck v. Hobson, supra, 408 F.2d at 180.

In this case, however, the asserted interest and its impairment are intimately bound together. For Opelka's interest is no different from that of all members of AIREA or all jointly designated members of AIREA and SREA, a fact which is emphasized by the addition of 71 such individuals as proposed intervenors by amendment to the complaint for intervention. The interest asserted is one that involves not being bound by the terms of the proposed settlement agreement and order. However, the terms of the agreement and order make clear that no individual member of AIREA is bound as such. The agreement and order direct AIREA to take certain actions. But since these actions are to be taken by the organization as such, there is no apparent way in which Opelka, or any member of AIREA or SREA, could violate the agreement and order and thereby become subject to enforcement proceedings.

In Smuck v. Hobson, supra, the court rejected efforts by a former superintendent of schools and a member of the [**17] Board of Education of the District of Columbia to intervene as of right or to appeal a district court order which had found that the Board had, in a variety of ways, acted unconstitutionally in administering the school system. The court concluded that the ex-superintendent did not have an interest sufficient to allow intervention because:

The original decision was not a personal attack upon [him], nor did it bind him personally once he left office. Smuck v. Hobson, supra, 408 F.2d at 177.

The board member was found to have no appealable interest because the Board had been sued as a collective entity and the order was enforceable against the Board alone as such. Id. at 178. So too, here, Opelka has no separate interest as an individual in the [*1081] litigation which could be affected by the settlement order since the order cannot be enforced against him nor can he violate it. See also Rios v. Enterprise Ass'n Steamfitters Local U. 638, 520 F.2d 352 (2d Cir. 1975).

However, even assuming that Opelka satisfies the "interest" and "impairment" requirements, his application for intervention is legally insufficient because he does not show that his [**18] interest is one which may be inadequately represented by an existing party. The burden of establishing inadequacy of representation rests on the applicant. Trbovich v. United Mine Workers of America, 404 U.S. 528, 538 n.10, 30 L. Ed. 2d 686, 92 S. Ct. 630 (1972). And although that burden is minimal, it must nonetheless be met. Commonwealth of Virginia v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 542 F.2d 214, 216 (4th Cir. 1976).

Opelka alleges that the governing council of AIREA is adverse to himself and to the Institute. He claims this inadequacy of representation is shown by the alleged "nonfeasance" of the governing council in failing to apprise him and other AIREA members of the litigation's development and to provide them with an opportunity to review or to vote on the proposed settlement agreement. 4 The United States argues that Opelka's interests, and that of all voluntary members of the Institute, are adequately represented by AIREA.

4 Opelka also alleges that the governing council lacked power to enter into the settlement agreement and hence its acts are ultra vires. There is no merit in this contention. See Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 32, § 163a4(b), (p). The Institute's by-laws vest control of its affairs in the governing council, except that the membership elects the council and approves all amendments to the by-laws.

[**19] In United States v. Board of School Commissioners of Indianapolis, 466 F.2d 573 (7th Cir. 1972), the court of appeals affirmed a district court's denial of a petition to intervene in a school desegregation case by a corporation, Citizens of Indianapolis for Quality Schools ("CIQS"). CIQS sought to challenge the entry of a consent decree and stipulations between the government and the school board. The court conceded that requirements of interest and impairment had been met, but found the proposed intervenors had not demonstrated that their interest was inadequately represented by the school board. The court established a standard for determining the adequacy of representation:

[Representation] is adequate if no collusion is shown between the representative and an opposing party, if the representative does not have or represent an interest adverse to the proposed intervenor and if the representative does not fail in the fulfillment of his duty. Id. at 575.

The proposed intervenors' claims that the school board, by entering into the consent decree and stipulation, had "failed to assert [the proposed intervenors'] interests as vigorously and effectively [**20] as they would have had they been parties to the litigation" were insufficient to establish inadequacy of representation. Id. Opelka's claims are likewise insufficient.

Opelka does not allege directly that there is any collusion between the United States and AIREA; and it is clear that there is none. As United States v. Board of School Commissioners of Indianapolis, supra, demonstrates, entry into a proposed settlement does not constitute such collusion per se. Here, AIREA initially responded to the complaint by filing an answer which, in addition to denying the substantive allegations of the complaint, raised statutory and constitutional defenses. The proposed settlement agreement and order is the product of negotiations between AIREA and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, scheduled prior to this litigation and continued thereafter, with the Department of Justice joining the negotiations. The court cannot conclude that the decision to enter into the settlement order rather than engage in what promises to be, in light of proceedings thus far, extensive, costly and complex litigation, evidences in any way collusion on the part of AIREA and [**21] the United States.

[*1082] Equally clearly, AIREA does not have or represent an interest adverse to petitioner. The purpose of a professional organization is to further the interests of its members. Where a party litigant is charged with representing the proposed intervenor's interests, a compelling showing is required to demonstrate that this representation is inadequate. United States v. International Business Machines Corp., 62 F.R.D. 530, 536 (S.D.N.Y. 1974), citing 7A C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure Civil § 1909 (1972); Shapiro, Some Thoughts on Intervention Before Courts, Agencies, and Arbitrators, 81 Harv.L.Rev. 721, 748 (1964). In Stadin v. Union Electric Co., 309 F.2d 912 (8th Cir. 1962), cert. denied, 373 U.S. 915, 10 L. Ed. 2d 415, 83 S. Ct. 1298 (1963), a shareholder sought to intervene as a party plaintiff in two civil antitrust actions brought by his corporation. Following the refusal by the board of directors and shareholders to bring certain suits, the shareholder sought to intervene, alleging that the directors' refusal to bring suit and purchase of certain equipment on behalf of the corporation "at rigged prices" was [**22] not in good faith and was a breach of trust; and that the corporation's attorney and director inadequately represented the shareholder's interest because he was not on friendly terms with the shareholder and had voted against the shareholder's proposals. Noting that the allegations of the proposed intervenor were to be taken as true, the court nonetheless added the caveat that this

does not mean . . . all statements in pleadings of this kind are to be accepted as true irrespective of their nature or content. . . . [Only] matters well pleaded . . . are entitled to the preferential status of assumed truth. Conclusory statements are not. Id. at 917.

The court then examined the shareholder's allegations, finding:

[They] speak of management's voting against the Stadin resolution and they charge that this bespeaks condonation and bad faith. These latter characterizations are only the pleader's conclusions. . . . We cannot escape the conclusion that Stadin's complaint as to inadequacy of representation lies largely in the area of asserted disagreement between lawyers as to how litigation should be conducted. Mere difference of opinion among attorneys [**23] is not of itself inadequate representation within the meaning of the Rule. If it were, intervention as of right would become almost automatic. Id. at 919.

Piercing the allegations of Opelka's complaint, the court finds the asserted inadequacy of representation is only the pleader's conclusion based on a difference of opinion as to how this litigation should be conducted. Opelka points to the Institute's failure to keep members apprised of the litigation's progress and concludes that its failure to present the proposed settlement agreement to AIREA membership for approval demonstrates inadequacy of representation. But the governing council had no such obligation. The by-laws of the Institute vest control of its affairs in the governing council. Relevant state law confers on the Institute the power "[to] sue and be sued, complain and defend, in its corporate name." Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 32, § 163a4(b). The failure to submit the proposed settlement order to the membership for approval does not evidence inadequacy of representation, in light of the by-laws and state statute. Opelka makes no allegation of bad faith, but only of bad judgment, in that he believes the governing [**24] council has not asserted the membership's interests as vigorously and effectively as he would have. That he would have utilized different litigation tactics does not mean that the governing council does not adequately represent his interests in this litigation as a member of AIREA.

AIREA's entry into the settlement agreement does not amount to a failure to fulfill its duty to represent its members, for much the same reasons as discussed above. In Alleghany Corp. v. Kirby, 344 F.2d 571 (2d Cir. 1965), writ of cert. vacated as improvidently granted, 384 U.S. 28, 86 S. Ct. 1250, 16 L. Ed. 2d 335 [*1083] (1966), shareholders sought to intervene in a derivative action following a decision by the board of directors not to petition for a writ of certiorari. The court declined to determine the issue of adequacy of representation on the basis of the soundness or improvidence of the board's decision to terminate the litigation. The court stated:

Adequacy of representation . . . depends not on our assessment of whether the Board should have authorized a certiorari petition, but rather on whether shareholder interests were fully and fairly considered when the Board reached [**25] its decision. Stated somewhat differently, the mere fact that a particular decision is adverse to certain interests does not necessarily mean those interests were not adequately represented in the decision-making process or in the decision itself. Id. at 574.

In this case, AIREA's entry into the proposed settlement agreement does not mean that it failed in its duty to represent membership interests. And, absent allegations of collusion or bad faith, the court will not delve into the decision-making process of the governing council nor into the soundness of its decision to terminate this litigation rather than pursue it to judgment on the merits. The fact that Opelka's opinions did not prevail in the governing council does not mean that those opinions were not fully and fairly considered. Accordingly, the court concludes that he is not entitled to intervene as of right to challenge the settlement agreement.

IV.

The court thus turns to a determination of whether Opelka should be permitted to intervene on a permissive basis. The court notes that the numerous objections to the settlement agreement and order raised by Opelka are also raised by the Society. Where the proposed [**26] intervenor merely underlines issues of law already raised by the primary parties, permissive intervention is rarely appropriate.

Additional parties always take additional time. Even if they have no witnesses of their own, they are the source of additional questions, objections, briefs, arguments, motions and the like which tend to make the proceeding a Donnybrook Fair. Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Co. v. Manning, Maxwell & Moore, Inc., 51 F. Supp. 972, 973 (D.Mass. 1943).

Therefore, the court declines to allow full-scale intervention which will inevitably bring about delay, repetition and the clouding of issues involved in the original cause of action. See Stadin v. Union Electric Co., supra at 920.

However, it is appropriate to allow Opelka to intervene to address the merits of the settlement agreement. The district court's discretion under Rule 24(b), F.R.Civ.P., includes the latitude to limit intervention to particular issues. Van Hoomissen v. Xerox Corp., 497 F.2d 180, 181 (9th Cir. 1974); Ionian Shipping Co. v. British Law Ins. Co., 426 F.2d 186, 191-92 (2d Cir. 1970). Opelka has indicated that, if granted leave to intervene, he will adopt the [**27] arguments made and authorities cited in his memorandum of law in support of his application for leave to intervene and in opposition to the proposed settlement order. The primary parties to this litigation have no objection to Opelka's permissive intervention so long as it is limited to challenges to the settlement he makes in his memorandum. Accordingly, the court grants Opelka leave to intervene on a permissive basis, limiting that intervention to the arguments raised by him that the settlement agreement and order infringe his first amendment rights.

V.

In many respects, a consent decree is a contract between the parties thereto. United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 420 U.S. 223, 236-37 n.10, 43 L. Ed. 2d 148, 95 S. Ct. 926 (1975). Although it must have judicial approval, a court reviewing such a decree does not inquire into the precise legal rights of the parties. See Florida Trailer & Equipment Co. v. Deal, [*1084] 284 F.2d 567, 571 (5th Cir. 1960). However, the court must be certain that "there has been valid consent by the concerned parties and that the terms of the decree are not unlawful, unreasonable, or inequitable." United States v. City of Jackson, [**28] Mississippi, 519 F.2d 1147, 1151 (5th Cir. 1975).

It has been recognized that consent decrees are "highly useful tools." Id. at 1151. While waiving their right to litigate the issues involved in the suit, parties "save themselves the time, expense, and inevitable risk of litigation." United States v. Armour & Co., 402 U.S. 673, 681, 29 L. Ed. 2d 256, 91 S. Ct. 1752 (1971). Most important, however, "the agreement reached . . . embodies a compromise; in exchange for the saving of cost and elimination of risk, the parties each give up something they might have won had they proceeded with the litigation." Id. "[The] inherent nature of a compromise is to give up certain rights or benefits in return for others." MacDonald v. Chicago Milwaukee Corp., 565 F.2d 416, 429 (7th Cir. 1977). Hence, a consent decree is not a precise delineation of legal rights.

With these principles in mind, the court turns to decide whether the proposed settlement agreement and order in this case are valid. First, the court finds that AIREA consented to the agreement and order. The agreement and order are the result of extensive negotiations not only between AIREA and the United States, but [**29] between AIREA and OFHEO/OVC. AIREA and HUD had agreed, prior to institution of this litigation, that possibilities of developing an affirmative action program for AIREA would be explored. After this suit was filed, the United States initially sought to terminate the discussions, but later consented to their continuance, provided government representatives could be present. As negotiations proceeded, the United States and AIREA found that settlement could be reached. AIREA agreed to adopt the statement of general policies which it had determined reflects sound appraisal practices; the United States determined to its own satisfaction that the policies satisfy the requirements of the Fair Housing Act. The court thus finds that there had been a valid consent by the concerned parties. Second, the court finds that, as to AIREA, the terms of the decree are not unlawful, unreasonable, nor inequitable. While it is true that the parties may have surrendered certain rights and benefits they might have vindicated or obtained through litigation, the surrender was in return for other rights and benefits.

The Society of Real Estate Appraisers raises several objections which, it argues, bar [**30] the court's approval of the settlement agreement and order. First, SREA argues that judicial approval of the settlement agreement and order places a judicial imprimatur on a specific theory of real estate appraisal, thereby stifling the exchange of ideas within the profession and condemning alternative theories. This argument overstates the effect of the settlement agreement and order. A consent decree is not a litigated judgment on the merits. The court's approval of the settlement agreement and order is not the judicial adoption of the real estate appraisal policies adopted by the parties therein. Rather, it is an approval of a compromise between the parties as validly consented to and not unlawful.

Second, SREA argues that the court's approval of the settlement agreement and order will irreparably prejudice SREA's defense to this action. In United States v. City of Jackson, Mississippi, supra, the United States and black municipal employees brought separate suits to remedy alleged racial discrimination in employment. The district court rendered judgment in the government's suit on a consent decree providing for injunctive relief and back pay to incumbent and former employees. [**31] In rejecting the employees' motion to intervene and to block the decree on the ground that its stare decisis effect would impair their efforts to obtain relief, the court stated:

This argument gives insufficient consideration . . . both to the significant differences between a consent decree and [*1085] a litigated judgment on the merits and to the good sense of the federal trial bench. . . . We cannot assume that courts will not recognize the special characteristics and purposes of consent decrees. To the contrary, we believe that courts fully understand that such decrees do not purport to be definitive statements of the parties' legal rights and will accord them little or no weight in the determination of the rights of persons not party to them. Id. at 1151-52.

Cf. Air Lines Stewards & Stewardesses Ass'n, Local 550 v. American Airlines, Inc., 455 F.2d 101, 106 (7th Cir. 1972). So too, here, the settlement agreement and order between the United States and AIREA should have no effect on the determination of SREA's rights.

Third, SREA argues that entry of the order will adversely affect SREA professionally. The Society argues that it will suffer [**32] lost business and diminished enrollment because potential clients and students will fear that by working with SREA they will be violating federal law. SREA also argues that appraisers who are joint members of AIREA and SREA will be placed in an untenable position and may resign from SREA to avoid violating federal law. Again, this argument overestimates the consequences of a consent decree. Moreover, it is speculative.

Opelka joins in SREA's objections, which this court rejects, and raises several of his own. He argues that, by the terms of the agreement and order, he may neither consider or communicate ideas pertaining to racial and ethnic factors which he believes to be relevant to the appraisal profession. Thus, he argues, the order impermissibly infringes on his first amendment rights. See Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro, 431 U.S. 85, 97 S. Ct. 1614, 52 L. Ed. 2d 155 (1977). The short answer to this argument, as discussed in Part III, supra, is that the order does not bind him because he is not a party. It cannot be enforced against him nor can he violate it. Under these circumstances, it does not violate his first amendment rights.

The fact [**33] that Opelka, as a member of AIREA, is bound by its by-laws does not change this court's view for these reasons. First, there is nothing in the record to indicate the by-laws of the Institute have been altered by the settlement agreement and order. Second, without the force of governmental sanctions behind the by-laws, it is unclear that any first amendment problem is necessarily raised by the Institute's requirement that he comply with its by-laws or professional canons as a condition of continued membership. See Cannon v. University of Chicago, 559 F.2d 1063, 1068-71 (7th Cir. 1977); Driscoll v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 139, 484 F.2d 682, 690 (7th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 960, 39 L. Ed. 2d 575, 94 S. Ct. 1490 (1974); compare Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co., 419 U.S. 345, 42 L. Ed. 2d 477, 95 S. Ct. 449 (1974). Third, and most importantly, whether in the future Opelka may be adversely affected, and his legal rights infringed, by some AIREA action, either pursuant to the settlement agreement and order or otherwise, is a question that is not ripe for decision. We cannot adjudicate that issue on the basis of predictions about the [**34] possible conduct of either Opelka or AIREA; their behavior turns on contingencies and requires guesses about the future. In substance, Opelka requests this court "to provide [him] with guidance for the future rather than to resolve a pending or threatened controversy between adverse parties. [The court has] no power to render such advice . . . ." Hanover Township Federation of Teachers, Local 1954 v. Hanover Community School Corp., 457 F.2d 456, 463 (7th Cir. 1972). Therefore, whether, at some future date, AIREA might act in some way as to infringe Opelka's legal rights is a question this court cannot reach. For the reasons stated, the court hereby approves the settlement order, the agreement, and the confidentiality order between the United States and AIREA and orders their immediate entry.

George N. Leighton, United States District Judge

September 28, 2011

mai appraiser

September 24, 2011

High Performance Green Building: What’s it worth? Theddi Wright Chappell, MAI, Appraisal Institut, "CANNOT BE QUANTIFIED."

High Performance Green Building:

What’s it worth?

"Though the exact impact of the green strategies employed at Alley24 East on the project’s market value cannot be quantigied. . . " http://cascadiagbc.org/news/GBValueStudy.pdf

Theddi Wright Chappell, MAI, Appraisal Institute

,

September 20, 2011

Debacle III

Debacle III

Sale or Financing Concessions

Note: This field, comprised of two lines, is used to capture sale type, financing type,

and any concessions. The information must be entered on line 1 and line 2 as

indicated.

Line 1

The appraiser must indicate the sale type for each comparable property. If more than

one sale type applies to the comparable property, the appraiser must start at the top of

the list and identify the first sale type that applies. The valid values are:

ABBREVIATED

ENTRY

SALE TYPE

REO REO sale

Short Short sale

CrtOrd Court ordered sale

Estate Estate sale

Relo Relocation sale

NonArm Non-arms length sale

ArmLth Arms length sale

Listing Listing

Note, The appraiser may report any other relevant information regarding the sale type,

including whether more than one sale type applies, elsewhere in the appraisal report.

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely Fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

September 02, 2011

IV. FREQUENTLY COMMITTED SINS (by MAI-Appraisal Institute- AI appraisers) IN VALUING CONSERVATION EASEMENTS

IV. FREQUENTLY COMMITTED SINS IN VALUING IV. FREQUENTLY COMMITTED SINS (by MAI-Appraisal Institute- AI appraisers)

CONSERVATION EASEMENTS

Below is a short list of

some common problems found in limited scope reviews of more than 80 purported “qualified

appraisals” of conservation easements at the end of 2003.

Many, while not fatal, highlight appraisers’ lack of familiarity with the Treasury Regulations;

these are easy to correct. Others are considered to be more serious technical flaws. These "sins"

can be informative when completing or reviewing easement appraisals.

1. Serious Technical Issues

A. Appraising the wrong property. Care should be taken that the appraisal's legal description

reflects the area covered by the easement. In addition, there are instances in which the

appraiser does not value all of the donor’s and their family’s property before and after

imposition of the easement (thus it doesn't reflect "enhancement" value as described

above).

B. Relying entirely on the Subdivision Development Analysis technique (which bases the

easement's "before" value on revenues generated by the development of the property). In

order to be valid, the subdivision development plan must be a permitted use according to

local zoning codes, must be technically feasible, and must be a likely form of

development given the local market. Many Subdivision Development Analyses are

frequently supported by:

inadequate land use plan without engineering input and lacking substantiated

development costs.

poorly supported forecasts of lot sale prices,

poorly supported lot absorption forecasts,

poorly supported discount rates,

inadequate profit allocation

C. Appraisals of second- or third-phase easements where the impact of the earlier easements

was improperly accounted for. This is one of the common problems associated with the

phasing of easements (placing an easement on only a portion of the property, with the

intention of doing additional easements in the coming years).

D. Ignoring or omitting existing zoning or property restrictions, such as covenants, deed

restrictions, rights-of-way, or other pre-existing limitations on use of the property.

A Conservation Easement Appraisal Guide Page 34

2. Lack of Familiarity with the Treasury Regulations

A. Using the wrong definition of market value

B. Failure to state that the appraisal was prepared for the income tax purposes of the donor

C. Easements with effective dates beyond the 60-day shelf life of their appraisal's effective

dates of value

3. Other More Serious Issues Not Directly Related to Appraisals

A. Appraisals of conservation easements without evident conservation purpose. Easements

without obvious conservation values and purpose risk not qualifying under Internal

Revenue Code 170(h) and as such, risk not qualifying for Colorado's state income tax

credit.

B. Clever division of family-owned lands intended to maximize donors’ tax credits and to

avoid the issue of "enhancement" values. The phasing of easements is not uncommon and

should only be considered by a land trust if each phased easement can stand alone on

conservation values and purpose. However, it is not acceptable to shelter properties

through various names or other methods in order to skirt the constraints of the tax credit

rules or to avoid the enhancement value.

IV. FREQUENTLY COMMITTED SINS (by MAI-Appraisal Institute- AI appraisers)

August 30, 2011

John S Brenan, Appraisal FOundation

From: Curits Harris [mailto:harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 1:27 PM
To: 'wsj.ltrs@wsj.com'
Subject: Editor: Appraisal Foundation Letter of August 17, 2011

Editor,

RE: John S. Brenan https://appraisalfoundation.sharefile.com/d/sd41485a674242298
Director of Appraisal Issues

Your article was on the mark! These folks at the Appraisal Foundation/Appraisal Institute are totally lost. Please see the following statement by Sara http://financialservices.house.gov/UploadedFiles/071311stephens.pdf President of the Appraisal Institute. She is arguing against a PROPOSED federal law that would outlaw the use of Non-armslength sales transactions, when appraising market value. Also, it was reported that Four States have already banned this process. I have been in the Real Estate Business since 1984 and never used a non-armslength sale as comparable to a Market Transaction, all one has to do is read the Definition of Market Value.

1 Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, December 10, 2010

The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:

(1) buyer and seller are typically motivated;

(2) both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what he or she considers his or her own best interest;

(3) a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;

(4) payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and

(5) the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.

REO's, Probate Sales, Gifts, and other Distressed Property Sales do not come close to meeting this definition. Maybe one could, although I would not, argue that no (4) payment in cash, is acceptable. Besides where are his citations? I have never read in any publication that this was an acceptable practice. In other words, they are making this stuff as they go along.

He, Brenan, speaks of a bifurcated market, duh!, what he calls bifurcated is actually two markets, one fair and the other distressed. Just as you would never use a Fair Sale to value a distressed property (i.e. for salvage value) you should never use a distressed sale for a fair market sale.

One last comment, Of course distressed sales affect the fair sale market but to use distressed sales as comparable further extirpates the problem, forcing a downward arithmetic move to a geometric one. PLEASE KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK, THE REAL ESTATE MARKET HAS BEEN SEVERELY NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY THE APPRAISAL FOUNDATION/APPRAISAL INSTITUTE.

P.S

If you wish to discuss this issue any further my contact information is below.

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification


The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

A WORD OF CAUTION: When selecting an Appraiser, Consultant, or Expert please pay close attention to his Resume/CV

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

August 29, 2011

HOW THE APPRAISAL BUSINESS WORKS, CHRIS WILLIAMS, gEORGE hARRISON

Now this person George harrison attacks me re"

How the Appraisal Institute - mai - Destroyed the Real Estate Industry

Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB • "How the Appraisal Institute-MAI Destroyed the Real Estate Industry."

All,
We are currently working on a book titled "How the Appraisal Institute-MAI Destroyed the Real Estate Industry." The book will discuss both Debacles I, which occurred in the 90's and affected mainly Commercial Properties that were only appraised by MAI-Appraisal Institute Members. And, Debacle II which occurred shortly after the MAI-SRA-Appraisal Institute entry into the Residential Appraiser Market. We are investigating their involvement with Tax Frauds in the Land Trust Tax Credit Program. Fraud and the overvaluation of real estate to close Real Estate Transactions and Mortgages. The fact that they were suspended and kicked out of the Appraisal Foundation, for their involvement in activities contrary to the Foundations Doctrine. Their, MAI-Appraisal Institute, present promulgation that appraisers should use non-arm's length sales transactions as comparables, contrary to logic, public policy, and law. The Fraud around their advertising that they are the best in the field, a real estate field, when very few of them have degrees in Real Estate. Their affiliation with Financial Institutions. Not to mention their latest report to congress which is full of lies and misrepresentations
http://financialservices.house.gov/UploadedFiles/071311stephens.pdf

The survival of the real estate industry depends on your assistance, the MAI-Appraisal Institute must go. If you can provide appraisals, information, or other documentation in support of, or rejecting, our premise please, please, contact me at the following email address. harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net

WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR COMMENTS AND A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM sARA.

George HarrisonI think that Curtis is misguided, but if he should go through with the book he should take Paul's advice. Some of what is said is inaccurate. The SRAs were always residential appraisers, and while you can blame some AI members for the '80s debacle, this last round was mostly licensed/certified unaffiliated appraisers. I really hate to see such animus toward the AI at a time when it has spent so much of its resources reprsenting appraisers at state and national level. No, I'm not a member, and I have a lot of genuine complaints, but today I find myself (and every informed appraiser) to be aligned with, and supportive of, the AI.

1 hour ago

I RESPOND:

August 27, 2011

How the Appraisal Institute Destroyed the Real Estate Industry

How the Appraisal Institute Destroyed the Real Estate Industry

Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB • "How the Appraisal Institute-MAI Destroyed the Real Estate Industry."

All,
We are currently working on a book titled "How the Appraisal Institute-MAI Destroyed the Real Estate Industry." The book will discuss both Debacles I, which occurred in the 90's and affected mainly Commercial Properties that were only appraised by MAI-Appraisal Institute Members. And, Debacle II which occurred shortly after the MAI-SRA-Appraisal Institute entry into the Residential Appraiser Market. We are investigating their involvement with Tax Frauds in the Land Trust Tax Credit Program. Fraud and the overvaluation of real estate to close Real Estate Transactions and Mortgages. The fact that they were suspended and kicked out of the Appraisal Foundation, for their involvement in activities contrary to the Foundations Doctrine. Their, MAI-Appraisal Institute, present promulgation that appraisers should use non-arm's length sales transactions as comparables, contrary to logic, public policy, and law. The Fraud around their advertising that they are the best in the field, a real estate field, when very few of them have degrees in Real Estate. Their affiliation with Financial Institutions. Not to mention their latest report to congress which is full of lies and misrepresentations
http://financialservices.house.gov/UploadedFiles/071311stephens.pdf

The survival of the real estate industry depends on your assistance, the MAI-Appraisal Institute must go. If you can provide appraisals, information, or other documentation in support of, or rejecting, our premise please, please, contact me at the following email address. harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net

WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR COMMENTS AND A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM sARA.

John O'Dwyer, MAI, MRICSThis comment is most likely not going yo last long as a post, but his dude Harris is a loose canon. His mind is a jumble and his opinions are most definitely extreme. As far as I know, but I can not be 100% certain, he has been ousted from other discussion groups. My advice is just don't play along!

Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REBHi John, didn't realize you were still in business. For all of you who do not know john, he is one of those frauds, mai, from the appraisal institute, posing as a real estate appraiser, He spends his free time following me all over the web.

This comes from his website, "JSO Valuation Group, Ltd. was founded in 1989 by John O’Dwyer, President. John has nearly 25-years of professional real estate experience (where is your resume john, still afraid to produce it. you work for a valuation group for 25 years? now where is your Real Estate Experience) He is a graduate from the University of Dublin, ( Yes folks that is Dublin Ireland, that tiny little brokeass-bankrupt island over there across the pond.) Trinity College 1984, majoring in real estate finance, town planning and economics ( We searched their website and could not find an offering for a real estate degree.) His experience began working as a senior appraiser in New York (1984-1987) and then as a senior loan appraiser in Chicago (1987-1989) (Now come on you disgusting fraud you graduated one day and the next you were a senior appraiser in New York, it must have been for a MAI Firm.) In 1989, John started his own appraisal company, JSO Valuation Group, Ltd. (Pretty good with at most 5 years of appraisal practice.)"

To cut to the chase john o’dwyer is a perfect example of what the appraisal institute - mai represents. A cluster of incopentent frauds. Rest assured he will be in the first chapter if not on the first page.

LIT john

John O'Dwyer, MAI, MRICSRest my case..... there is nothing more to say!

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification


The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

A WORD OF CAUTION: When selecting an Appraiser, Consultant, or Expert please pay close attention to his Resume/CV

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

August 25, 2011

Ann O'Rourke, AI, Appraisal Institute, MAI, Promoutes Colusion between Appraisers and Agents

Ann O'Rourke, AI, Appraisal Institute, MAI, Promoutes Colusion between Appraisers and Agents

10 Strategies For Improving Your Chances of Getting a Fair Appraisal

Here's a quote:

"2. Supply all potentially relevant data. "Basically, you can provide almost anything that you can think of that is going to support the value of the house," Mitchell said. This can include information on the market and absorptions as well as property specifications, home plans, and product details for the home or project in question. You may also want to give the appraiser copies of recent HUD-1 statements if they aren't in the land records yet or examples of recently executed contracts. Allen W. Gardiner, who provided the appraiser perspective on the NAHB/Builder Partnerships webinar, agreed. "One of the biggest mistakes I find is that builders hide data," said Gardiner, who is vice president of residential at Jackson Claborn, a Plano, Texas-based real estate consulting and appraisal firm. "I would encourage you to provide all relevant data. If it was a low sale, let [the appraiser] know and explain how it is different from the others."

My comment: this article was written for home builders but I have been telling sales people about some of this for many years. It is particularly useful today when many appraisals are done through AMCs with low fees, fast turnaround, and out of the area appraisers. When an agent tells me that she "Doesn't want to do the appraisers job", I say "the appraiser gets $350 and you get how much if your deal closes"? (Ann O'Rourke)


click here to read
http://www.builderonline.com/business/10-strategies-for-improving-your-chances-of-getting-a-fair-appraisal.aspx

------------------------------------------------

How to Prevent a Low Appraisal - 9 tips

Here's a quote:

"5. Notes. Go through each individual comparable listing and write notes that compare it to the subject property. For instance, on my most recent appraisal, the specific property had a significant amount of upgraded features. So on each comparable I went through and wrote things like, "Paints need updating, subj. prop. is move in ready," "subj. prop. has upgraded kitchen or bathroom, this does not," or things like "subj. prop. has new, laminate flooring throughout the house, this comp has carpet throughout." Dates of installs, quality of material, etc. Write whatever you can."

"7. Give the appraiser what they ask for: If the appraiser asks for the RPA (Residential Purchase Agreement), send it to them. Don't forget. If they ask for the permits, get the permits and give the permits to the appraiser. I was recently asked for an RPA at an appraisal. Since I use DropBox on my iPhone and iPad, I immediately emailed the documents to the appraiser and he had them before the appraisal was over."

My comments: I always do this when meeting an agent for a relocation appraisal. Then I confirm with the listing agent on the sale. I like to call the listing agent to find out the "story" behind the sale. Whenever I give a presentation to real estate agents I always include tips on how to work with the appraiser. (Ann O'Rourke)

click here to read more
http://kevinpaffrath.com/how-to-prevent-a-low-appraisal


August 23, 2011

rE How the Appraisal Institute - mai Destroid the Real Estate Industry

From: Michael J. Martin [mailto:mjmartin@martinpropertyresearch.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 7:16 PM
To: harris_curtis@sbcglobal.net
Subject: re: after the horse is out

rE How the Appraisal Institute - mai Destroid the Real Estate Industry

of the barn............

after the horse is out of the barn, dumb ranchers shut the doors.............

Michael J. Martin, CFA, MAI

President
Martin Property Research, Inc.

1540 South Holly Street, Suite 4
Denver, CO 80222

Phone (303) 768-8366

Fax (303) 484-2421



Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification


The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

A WORD OF CAUTION: When selecting an Appraiser, Consultant, or Expert please pay close attention to his Resume/CV

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

I got my start, I remember that MAI was described to me as meaning "Made As Instructed" and

John FergusonThere are good and bad apples in any profession but being an appraiser I have seen a lot of bad appraisers both MAI and SRA. In the 80's, when I got my start, I remember that MAI was described to me as meaning "Made As Instructed" and most of the appraisers getting their ass chewed were the MAI appraisers. In California in the 90's we had our own crisis with Mello Roos Bonds and guess who did the bogus appraisals on those...yup MAI appraisers exclusivly. In the current crisis I know of some SRA appraisers that should be in prison for their part in approving fraudulent appraisals and getting in bed with the banks sales departments. On the AI itself I would like to know how it has helped us as a group, only a small percentage of appraisers belong to that organization. I think at one time they might have had some clout but how effective can an organization really be when they are almost broke? I agree with Bill on the book by Bethany Mclean and Joe it is awesome;-) http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=24243343&authType=name&authToken=504a&trk=anet_mfeed_profile

DIANE DiBERNARDO, Managing Director

DIANE DiBERNARDO, Managing Director

Diane DiBernardo brings an impressive spectrum of experience to the Argianas team with almost 20 years as a commercial real estate appraiser. Joining the Argianas team in 2010, Diane is responsible for training, reviewing and coordinating appraisal assignments for certain clients. She is an expert in ARGUS discounted cash flow software.

Diane's extensive experience includes the valuation of fee simple, leased fee and leasehold interests for a wide range of purposes including bank financing, internal asset management, estate planning, and litigation support. Her assignments have included all property types throughout the Midwest including existing and proposed single and multi-tenant office, retail, industrial and residential developments. Diane's familiarity with real estate income analysis is apparent in her appraisal work involving downtown office buildings, community retail centers, and entire residential subdivisions. Special purpose valuation and/or consulting assignments have included easements, billboard signage, self-storage facilities, barge terminals, hotels, golf courses, automotive service stations, and car washes. She is also familiar with the analysis of affordable and low-income housing with special financing and/or income tax credits.

On the road to obtaining the MAI designation, Diane has completed all three levels of appraisal experience which has been formally reviewed and accepted by the Appraisal Institute. She has successfully completed all the necessary coursework and the 16-hour comprehensive exam. With only the demonstration appraisal report remaining, Diane is expected to receive the coveted MAI designation in 2012.

Education
Diane earned her Bachelor Degree in Management from Northeastern Illinois University. She continues her education through various classes and seminars offered by the Appraisal Institute.

Professional Affiliations
Diane is an Associate Member of the Appraisal Institute and a Certified General Real Estate Appraiser in the State of Illinois.

NOW THIS IS HOW UNEDUCATED THESE FOLKS ARE: Diane DiBernardo • "Why would you post this nonsense on the Appraisal Institute's group page? I don't have time to repute every point, but how long do you think a degree in Real Estate has been available? You're showing your age, kid." SHE ACTS LIKE A DEGREE IN REAL ESTATE IS SOMETHING NEW, I GOT MY DEGREE IN 1979 FROM CSULA, AND STARTED THE PROGRAM IN 1975. SHE GOT A DEGREE IN MANAGEMENT AND PROFESS TO BE AN APPRAISER.

August 21, 2011

Sara W. Stephens mai, Appraisal Institute

Sara W. Stephens mai

SaraStephens_150x150.jpg

2011/2012 President, Appraisal Institute

"Stephens graduated magna cum laude from the University of Arkansas at Little Rock with a degree in mathematics and English. She has a master’s degree from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville, where she also completed some post-graduate work. She taught calculus, advanced trigonometry and algebra in the Little Rock Public School District and at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock.

She is the owner and principal of Richard A. Stephens and Associates, the oldest appraisal firm in Little Rock. Along with her business partner and husband, Richard A. Stephens, MAI, SRA,(NEPITISUM) she maintains a practice offering a broad scope of services, specializing in eminent domain, litigation support and real estate tax appeal.

Stephens is one of eight members of the American Society of Real Estate Counselors in Arkansas, and the only woman invited to membership in Arkansas."

lET'S TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT HER BACKGROUND, PLEASE. SHE REPRESENTS "25,000" REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS WITH THIS BACKGROUND you gotta be kidding me. SHE LIKE ALL THE REST ARE A BUNCH OF FRAUDS AND CROOKS! BEWARE of the MAI-APPRAISAL INSTITUTE.

Sara W. Stephens mai, Appraisal Institute

August 20, 2011

Is it any wonder? Look at her resume. Sara W. Stephens, MAI-Appraisal Institute

Is it any wonder? Look at her resume. MAI-Appraisal Institute


Member_Image 
Sara W. Stephens, MAI
Richard A. Stephens & Assoc., Inc.
President
Regions Center
400 West Capitol, Suite 1222
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 372-7513
Fax: (501) 372-7535
Cell: (501) 944-6744
swstephens@prodigy.net
Standards & Ethics Education Completed
Accepts Fee Assignments (more info)




Primary Market Area
State of Arkansas with ephasis on the Little Rock/North Little Rock MSA, particularly Pulaski, Perry, Lonoke, White, Faulkner and Jefferson Counties

Secondary Market Area
Northeast, Northwest, Southeast and Southwest Arkansas

I have been asked, by Realtors and Realist, in the past what can we do? SUPPORT PASSAGE OF THIS BILL AND GET RID OF THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE-MAI.

I have been asked, by Realtors and Realist, in the past what can we do? SUPPORT PASSAGE OF THIS BILL AND GET RID OF THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE-MAI.

(2) REALISTIC MARKET BASED APPRAISALS-

        (A) VALUATION STANDARD- The appropriate Federal banking agency shall require that entities used by financial institutions to assess the value of collateral, with respect to a real estate loan, associated with any viable project in such institution's lending portfolio utilize an as completed valuation to make such an assessment.

        (B) ARMS LENGTH TRANSACTIONS- The appropriate Federal banking agency shall require that entities used by financial institutions to assess or review underwriting standards and collateral values for real estate loans made by such institutions after the date of the enactment of this Act use comparable sales involving arms length transactions to make such an assessment or review.

Wanna know Why you cannot get a SALE TO CLOSE? From the Mouth of the Appraisal Institute-President

Wanna know Why you cannot get a SALE TO CLOSE? From the Mouth of the Appraisal Institute-President

Wanna know Why you cannot get a SALE TO CLOSE?From the Mouth of the Appraisal Institute-President

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.1755.IH:

C. Appraisers should be allowed to analyze all sales in a market, and their judgment and expertise

should be respected

In 2011, four bills were introduced in state legislatures (Illinois, Maryland, Missouri, and Nevada), and one bill was

introduced in Congress and referred to this Committee, to inappropriately legislate the appraisal process. Each

proposal would prohibit the use of distressed sales, such as foreclosure sales or short sales, as comparables in

an appraisal of a parcel of real property. While we sympathize with the plight of those in today’s real estate

market, we strongly oppose such bills, for they will only contribute to an asset bubble and place lenders at great

risk.

It seems reasonable to assume that distressed sales should not form the basis for market value opinions. But, in

some markets, they are such heavy weights on value that they must be considered along with appropriate

adjustments. Distressed sales such as foreclosure sales and short sales are common in a declining market.

Depending on the severity of the local market downturn, some, many, or even all sales that occur do so under

distressed conditions. Appraisers cannot categorically discount foreclosures and short sales as potential

comparable data in the sales comparison approach. However, due to differences between their conditions of sale

and the conditions outlined in the market value definition they might not be usable as market information.

Foreclosures and short sales usually do not meet the conditions outlined in the definition of market value. A short

sale or a sale of a property that occurred prior to a foreclosure might have involved atypical seller motivations

(e.g., a highly motivated seller). A sale of a bank-owned property might have involved typical motivations, so the

fact that it was a foreclosed property would not render it ineligible as meaningful comparable data that should be

considered in developing a credible appraisal. However, if the foreclosed property was sold without a typical

marketing program, or if it had become stigmatized as a foreclosure, it might need to be adjusted if used as

comparable evidence of value. Further, some foreclosed properties are in inferior condition, so adjustments for

physical condition may be needed.

As is always the case in selecting sales to use as comparable market information, appraisers must investigate the

circumstances of each transaction, including whether atypical motivations or sales concessions were involved,

the property was exposed on the market for a typical amount of time, the marketing program was typical, or

whether the property condition was compromised. Adjustments might need to be made for these circumstances.

When it is necessary to use a distressed sale as evidence of value, the appraiser must carefully analyze the

Testimony of Appraisal Institute President-Elect Sara Stephens, MAI, CRE

July 13, 2011

current local market to determine if an adjustment for conditions of sale is needed. If no adjustment is warranted,

the lack of adjustment should be explained.

Physical condition and conditions of sale are two distinctly different factors that must be considered separately.

They may be related to some degree in a distressed market, but not necessarily. An appraiser must not assume,

for example, that a property was in inferior condition simply because it was a foreclosure. The level of

investigation needed to meet the requirement for sufficient diligence is generally more than is needed in nondistressed

market situations. Further, supporting such adjustments can be particularly challenging when there are

few current transactions to analyze. Competency in performing such investigation and analysis is essential, which

is why we believe the best and most productive way to alleviate concerns about appraisals in complex markets is

to ensure that highly qualified appraisers– particularly those with advanced training, peer review, and competency

exams – are used by lenders and their agents.

Further, under federal and state law, appraisers are required to follow the Uniform Standards of Professional

Appraisal Practice (USPAP). USPAP Standards Rule 1-4(a) requires that appraisers "must analyze such

comparable sales data as are available." This means all sales, including foreclosures and short sales. In some

markets, there are so many distressed sales that they are the market and must be considered. When there is a

glut of distress sales in the marketplace, and those properties are truly comparable to the subject, it would be

misleading not to use them as part (or in some cases all) of the basis for a value conclusion.

USPAP further states that, "When compliance with USPAP is required by Federal law or regulation, no part of

USPAP can be voided by a law or regulation of a state or local jurisdiction."

As such, we urge that this Committee refrain from legislating the appraisal process and refrain from advancing the

appraisal provisions of H.R. 1755, as introduced.

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume:

http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog:http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

A WORD OF CAUTION: When selecting an Appraiser, Consultant, or Expert please pay close attention to his Resume/CV

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

August 13, 2011

Tim Bradley, mai, member of the appraisal institute, Jackson Hole Commercial Real Estate , Lier and Crook

Tim Bradley, mai, member of the appraisal institute, Jackson Hole Commercial Real Estate Lier and Crook

"In a sign of the times, the building was recently posted for foreclosure. The owners listed the building for $6,975,000 early this year, and the price has now dropped to $5,400,000." http://activerain.com/blogsview/1360304/jackson-hole-15-e-deloney-jackson-drug-building

"Thanks all for stopping by! Here's an update...the building ultimately sold for $4,500,000!

Lynn: I know. I used to live just a few blocks from the old theater on Greenville Avenue. Loved that neighborhood."

August 02, 2011

Appraisal Institute President calls for Collaboration between Real Estate Agents and Appraisers

THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY IS CALLING FOR APPRAISER INDEPENDENCE. NOT THE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE.

"As such, there must be an increased emphasis on collaboration and data sharing between builders, loan originators, lenders, real estate agents, appraisers and all other parties involved in residential real estate transactions. " http://www.scotsmanguide.com/default.asp?ID=4699&part=1

BY:

geovisit();<img src="http://visit.webhosting.yahoo.com/visit.gif?us1305930940" alt="setstats" border="0" width="1" height="1">

April 13, 2011

Entire Deduction Disallowed Due to Numerous Appraisal Failures

Entire Deduction Disallowed Due to Numerous Appraisal Failures

In Boltar v. Commissioner 136 T.C. No. 14 (2011) the Court excluded the developer partnership’s experts’ appraisal as unreliable and irrelevant. The Court sustained the IRS allowance of only $42,400 out of $3,245,000 claimed as a charitable contribution deduction on the partnership return of Boltar, L.L.C. (Boltar) for a conservation easement on 8 land-locked acres in Indiana. Boltar’s experts failed to apply the correct legal standard by failing to determine the value of the donated easement by the before and after valuation method, failed to value contiguous parcels owned by a partnership, and assumed development that was not feasible on the subject property. The Court specifically stated that the appraiser qualifications were not in question. What motivated the Court to reject Boltar’s appraisals was the multiple failures and abuses in the appraisal methodology as well as significant factual errors affecting value. The Court stated, “The problem is created by their willingness to use their resumes and their skills to advocate the position of the party who employs them without regard to objective and relevant facts, contrary to their professional obligations.” And later, “…we need not blindly admit absurd expert opinions.” And finally, ” In addition, the cottage industry of experts who function primarily in the market for tax benefits should be discouraged.” At least from the context of the decision, the Court appears to be directing the last comment at those who enable abusive appraisals and tax schemes. Learn more by visiting http://taxtrials.com/, then click on Boltar. Note that this site has many tax opinions available.


July 26, 2010

The Appraisal Institute shall be suspended as an Appraisal Sponsor effective September 15,

1155 15th Street, NW, Suite 1111
Washington, DC 20005
T 202.347.7722
F 202.347.7727
STATEMENT TO
THE SPONSORING ORGANIZATIONS OF
THE APPRAISAL FOUNDATION
The Board of Trustees of The Appraisal Foundation met in open session on Tuesday, June 15, 2010 to hear allegations that the Appraisal Institute had engaged in conduct detrimental to the interests of The Appraisal Foundation. The Board then went into Executive Session to deliberate the matter and subsequently recessed the meeting prior to the completion of its agenda. The Board reconvened on Monday, July 12, 2010 to
complete its work and we want to advise you of the actions taken by the Board of Trustees.
The following resolutions of the Board of Trustees were adopted by the required two-thirds majority as set forth in the Foundation Bylaws:

RESOLUTION #1
RESOLVED, that upon consideration of the information and materials presented to the Board of Trustees with respect to the conduct of the Appraisal Institute related to an amendment to Title XI, namely, “to maintain the independence of the Appraisal Standards and Appraiser Qualifications Boards and to avoid potential conflicts of interest, the Appraisal Foundation shall not directly or indirectly offer or sponsor any qualifying or continuing education courses for certified or licensed real estate appraisers beyond the National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice course specifically required for licensure and certification” The Board of Trustees has concluded that the Appraisal Institute engaged in conduct materially and seriously prejudicial to the purposes and interests of the Foundation;

RESOLUTION #2
RESOLVED, that as a result of engaging in such conduct, the Appraisal Institute shall be sanctioned as follows:

1) The Appraisal Institute shall be suspended as an Appraisal Sponsor effective September 15, 2010 and ending on April 15, 2011;

2) Permission by The Appraisal Foundation to the Appraisal Institute to reproduce the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) without charge and (b) its discount on the purchase price of USPAP shall be revoked for a period commencing September 15, 2010 and ending on July 1, 2012;

Statement to The Sponsoring Organizations

Page Two

RESOLUTION #3
RESOLVED, The Chair of The Appraisal Foundation shall promptly appoint a task force comprised of not less than three nor more than five members from the Board of Trustees to liaison with the Appraisal Institute during the period of suspension, or for such longer period as the Chair may determine, for the purpose of rehabilitating the relationship of the Appraisal Institute with The Appraisal Foundation as an Appraisal Sponsor.

The bylaws of The Appraisal Foundation outline a process for Sponsors who are about to be expelled or suspended from the Foundation to address the Board of Trustees. Section 5.04 (c) (ii) states:

“The Sponsor shall be given an opportunity to be heard (either orally or in
writing at the election of the Sponsor) not fewer than ten (10) days prior to the
effective date of any proposed suspension or expulsion. If requested by a
Sponsor, a hearing shall be held by the Board of Trustees to determine whether
the suspension or expulsion should take place. If a written statement is
submitted by the Sponsor, such written statement shall be considered by the
Board of Trustees prior to determining whether the suspension or expulsion
should take place.”

June 25, 2010

Swing LOW sweet TIMOTHY (LOWE,) MAI, appraisal institute

Posted by cochise on June 25, 2010 at 19:12:09: http://www.hwforums.com/2191/messages/746.html

Swing LOW sweet TIMOTHY (LOWE,) MAI, appraisal institute

"TIMOTHY LOWE, MAI, CRE, FRICS
WARONZOF ASSOCIATES, INC.
Principal
timothy lowe
As Principal with Waronzof, Mr. Lowe is responsible for
directing real estate consulting and valuation engagements
including strategy and best practice analyses, market and
highest & best use studies, market value and fair compensation
appraisals; acquisition due diligence; economic feasibility
analysis; and advanced financial analyses for large-scale project
development. Mr. Lowe’s practice includes emphasis in
litigation, investment analysis and counseling. His experience
includes appraisal and consulting engagements across the
continental United States, Alaska and Hawaii, Canada and
Argentina, and includes such notable properties and projects as
the West Edmonton Mall (Edmonton), South Coast Plaza
Shopping Center (Costa Mesa), AT&T Park (home to the San
Francisco Giants), Belmont Learning Center (Los Angeles), the
Kapolei City development in Hawaii, the Tren de la Costa
project in Buenos Aires, a 5 million acre natural resource
portfolio in Washington State, Ambassador College (Pasadena)
redevelopment, Two Wall Street (New York), Boeing Field
(Seattle), the Skywalker Ranch facility of director George Lucas
(San Francisco), the three million square foot Air Force Plant #19
(San Diego), the 40 mile long Peninsula Commute Rail Corridor
(San Francisco to San Jose), and the 4,000 acre Girdwood
Development & Disposal Plan project (Anchorage). Mr. Lowe is
a member of the Green Building Finance Consortium, an
industry group working to establish underwriting and valuation
guidelines for sustainable buildings.
Prior to founding Waronzof, Mr. Lowe was a Director in the Real
Estate Consulting and Litigation Practice with Deloitte & Touche
in Los Angeles, and earlier a Vice President and Chief Appraiser
with Arthur Gimmy International in San Francisco. He began
his career as an appraiser and consultant in Anchorage. Mr.
Lowe has been accepted as an expert witness in state and federal
courts in the areas of real estate and going concern valuation,
project feasibility and plan feasibility. Mr. Lowe is a designated
member of the Appraisal Institute (MAI), a member of The
Counselors of Real Estate (CRE) and a Fellow of the Royal
Institute of Chartered Surveyors (FRICS). Additionally Mr.
Lowe is an associate member of the Urban Land Institute and a
member of Lambda Alpha, the Land Economics Society."

I SEASE TO BE AMAIZED! HE DID ALL THIS, BUT WHERE ARE HIS QUALIFICATIONS? sWING lOW PLEASE COME CLEAN WHERE ARE YOUR QUALIFICATIONS?

June 09, 2010

Announcement from USPAP, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

Announcement from USPAP, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice
I would like to ask you to forward this invite for the USPAP group on LinkedIn to Appraisers and other users of Appraisal Services that you believe may benefit from being a member and may provide productive discussion.

Please FORWARD this invitation to others to become a part of the USPAP, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Group on LinkedIn. To find us on LinkedIn they can use this link http://www.linkedin.com/groupRegistration?gid=1873048

We now have 1,158 members now and growing. Our members include more AQB Certified USPAP Instructors than any group I am aware of, with the exception of The Appraisal Foundation itself. We also have multiple people in leadership from The Appraisal Foundation, the Appraisal Section of NAR, NAIFA, AI, ASA, FannieMae, Freddie Mac and numerous regulatory Appraisers and investigatory Appraisers, truly a unique mix. In addition to those there are many other Appraisers, lenders, AMC representatives, Appraisal school representatives and others with an interest in USPAP and what it is we do.

We welcome your participation and comments, so we might learn from you and share with you our collective knowledge and experiences.

Please take the next step and forward this invitation.

Regards,

Don

Donald J. Martin, SCRP, RAA, GAA, CDEI
Appraising Since 1977
Residential, Agricultural, Commercial & Industrial Appraisers
AQB Certified USPAP Instructor
Certified Distance Education Instructor
ERC Certified
FHA/HUD Certified
VA Fee Panel
IL Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Expires 09/30/11
IN Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Expires 06/30/12
WI Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Expires 12/14/11

March 28, 2010

Pier Review of Office Appraisal by A. Brennon Chadwick, III, mai

Pier Review of Office Appraisal by A. Brennon Chadwick, III, mai

http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&gid=2103328&discussionID=16340384&goback=%2Eanh_2103328

We will be discussing the many errors in this appraisal. Please participate and show us how smart you are. I will be making numerious comments as we proceed. Thanks!

http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/files/02A_Jacksonville_Appraisal.pdf

February 27, 2010

Wayne Foss, mai appraisal

Cochise007
Another good example of why the commercial appraisal business is so skrewed up http://www.hwforums.com/2191/messages/638.html Wayne Foss, mai appraisal

The Harris Company, REA/C, http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

January 28, 2010

Sue the Appraisal Institute, MAI, SRA, SRPA

Sue the Appraisal Institute, MAI, SRA, SRPA, They make the following claims and typically produce a shody product, see: http://www.hwforums.com/2191/ They claim to have "the knowledge and experience to make sound 'real estate decisions.'" Hell! they cannot even get the value right now they want you to think that they are qualified real estate consultants. Appraisers usually carry E&O insurance of up to Two Million Dollars, this may not seem like much but the Appraisal Institute has Deep Pockets, but you had better file early. I feel the best way to get rid of these frauds is to sue them out of existence. Please contact us for a free MAI, SRPA, SRA, appraiser review.

"Choose an Appraiser with the MAI, SRA or SRPA Designation

In today’s turbulent real estate market, you want a professional with the knowledge and experience to make sound real estate decisions. When you see the MAI, SRA or SRPA designation, you can rest assured you are making the right choice.

All Appraisal Institute members holding the MAI, SRA or SRPA designation are required to:

  • Complete rigorous education requirements, submit extensive specialized appraisal experience, demonstrate appraisal report writing abilities and potentially pass a comprehensive examination. All requirements to obtain the MAI, SRA or SRPA designations are significantly above the state and federal requirements.

  • Conduct his or her professional activities in accordance with the Appraisal Institute’s Code of Professional Ethics and are subject to a peer review process, which enforces the Code of Professional Ethics.

  • Adhere to strict continuing education requirements to ensure they are up-to-date with the evolving real estate field.

  • In addition, the Appraisal Institute’s MAI, SRA and SRPA designations have long been recognized by courts of law, government agencies, financial institutions and investors as marks of excellence in the field of real estate valuation and analysis. "

January 08, 2010

MADE AS INSTRUCTED APPRAISAL BROUGHT TO YOU BY JOHN R PEXTON (mai, APPRAISAL INSTITUTE, ASSOCIATE)

MADE AS INSTRUCTED APPRAISAL BROUGHT TO YOU BY JOHN R PEXTON (mai, APPRAISAL INSTITUTE, ASSOCIATE)

The asking price for the ranch at this time was $7.3 million. Court records go on to state that on Aug. 12, 2005, after it became clear the military was seeking an $8 million appropriation to purchase the ranch, Grommet had Newman write a letter to the guard stating that the new listing price was $7.7 million for the entire ranch.

Two appraisers - both certified appraisers in the State of Wyoming - were hired by the military to evaluate the ranch. Jim Hastings appraised the ranch at $7.5 million while John Pexton (mai, appraisal institute, associate) appraised the ranch at $7.95 million.
http://www.pcrecordtimes.com/v2_news_articles.php?heading=0&page=72&story_id=1432

John R. Pexton (MAI, APPRAISAL INSTITUTE, ASSOCIATE)
Saddleback Appraisals
Owner
P.O. Box 30
107 North 6th Street
Douglas WY 82633
(307) 358-4932
Accepts Fee Assignments (more info)

November 15, 2009

Appraisal Adjustments, Curtis-Rosenthal, MAI, Appraisal Institute:

Appraisal Adjustments, Curtis-Rosenthal, MAI, Appraisal Institute: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/files/Curtis_Rosenthal.pdf

August 21, 2007

AI, Appraisal Institute, MAI, and Others Conspire to Influence public policy.

AI, Appraisal Institute, MAI, and Others Conspire to Influence public policy.

"This year we are proud to be joined by NAIFA because the more we can speak as a unified profession, the more success we will have in influencing public policy."


"Legislators and government officials will hear a unified voice from the real estate appraisal profession during 2007, thanks to an agreement signed by the four largest appraisal organizations in the United States.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Appraisers+on+same+page+in+Washington-a0161921774

Follow Ups:

Appraisers on same page in Washington.


Ads by GoogleCertified Appraisal Lic.
Become a Certified Residential Appraiser. Online Accredited Course
Appraisal.RealEstateLicense.com FHA Certified Appraisers
FHA Approved, 48 Hr Turn Time Covering the Greater SF Bay Area
www.sfbayappraisal.net Real Estate Appraisal
Enter Your Zip Code & Connect To Pre-Screened Real Estate Appraisers
www.ServiceMagic.com


Link to this page
<a href="http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Appraisers+on+same+page+in+Washington-a0161921774">Appraisers on same page in Washington.</a>

Legislators and government officials will hear a unified voice from the real estate appraisal Real estate appraisal

An estimate of the value of property using various methods.
profession during 2007, thanks to an agreement signed by the four largest appraisal organizations in the United States.

The Appraisal Institute, the American Society of Appraisers (ASA Asa (ā`sə), in the Bible, king of Judah, son and successor of Abijah. He was a good king, zealous in his extirpation of idols. When Baasha of Israel took Ramah (a few miles N of Jerusalem), Asa bought the help of Benhadad of Damascus and ), the American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers (ASFMRA), and the National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers (NAIFA NAIFA National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (formerly NALU)
NAIFA National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers
NAIFA Nevada Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors
) have signed an agreement that will enable the organizations to work cooperatively in the area of government relations.

Ads by GoogleCalifornia Appraisers
State Certified - 24hr Turnaround Credit cards. Long Beach,California
www.avaluecorp.com Residential Appraisers
Free Estimates From Pre-Screened Residential Appraisers In Your Area
www.HomeBlue.com/Appraisers

Under the agreement, the Washington, D.C. Office of the Appraisal Institute will be responsible for monitoring proposed real estate legislation and will keep members of all four organizations informed of relevant federal and state regulatory real estate issues.

"For the past few years, the Appraisal Institute has worked successfully with the ASA and ASFMRA in advocating for issues that are important to our members," said Don Kelly, the Appraisal Institute's chief external relations officer. "This year we are proud to be joined by NAIFA because the more we can speak as a unified profession, the more success we will have in influencing public policy."

The legislative issues and activities the appraisal organizations will pursue during 2007 include: Achieving appraisal licensing reform to ensure greater professionalism; Combating mortgage fraud by working with Congress and other organizations on solutions to the deficient regulatory structure for the appraisal and lending communities; Supporting appraiser independence as a consumer benefit; Promoting professional appraisers as a resource for a wide array of real estate concerns.

"The issues of mortgage fraud and predatory lending are likely to be near the top of the agenda for several Congressional committees," noted Bill Garber, director of Government Affairs for the Appraisal Institute. "It's important that the top real estate appraisal organizations speak with a unified voice to help enact change."

The Appraisal Institute represents more than 21,000 members worldwide. Members may hold the prestigious MAI MAI Mail (File Name Extension)
MAI Multilateral Agreement on Investment
MAI Maius (Latin: May)
MAI Ministerul Administratiei si Internelor (Romanian)
, SRPA SRPA Senior Real Property Appraiser (Appraisal Institute)
SRPA Snake River Plain Aquifer
SRPA Sala de Recuperação Pós-anestésica
SRPA Special Registration Plate Account (license plate fund, North Carolina)
and SRA SrA
abbr.
senior airman
designations. Appraisal Institute members adhere to a strictly enforced Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.

The American Society of Appraisers is an organization of appraisal professionals and others interested in the appraisal profession.

The American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers is a professionally trained group of farm managers, rural appraisers, review appraisers and accredited accredited

recognition by an appropriate authority that the performance of a particular institution has satisfied a prestated set of criteria.


accredited herds
cattle herds which have achieved a low level of reactors to, e.g. agricultural consultants capable of providing expert guidance and assistance to farmland owners, farmers, and other groups which have caretaking responsibilities for farm lands and rural properties.

The National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers is a nonprofit professional association of real estate appraisers.

agricultural consultants capable of providing expert guidance and assistance to farmland owners, farmers, and other groups which have caretaking responsibilities for farm lands and rural properties. The National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers is a nonprofit professional association of real estate appraisers.

August 20, 2007

Are predetermined Appraisal ADJUSTMENTS Legal/Ethical?

Are predetermined Appraisal ADJUSTMENTS Legal/Ethical? Please see attached
Predetermined adjustments provided by
Curtis - Rosenthal, Inc. (MAI Appraiser Los
Angeles) LLC. an MAI Firm. You be the judge and get back with us or call them for this
years update. If your property was acquired by the Los Angeles World Airport (LAWA) you
had better read this!

 

 

[ Yahoo! ] options

December 23, 2011

On the MOVE! Commercial Appraiser - Appraisal Blog.

We have had over 100,000 visitors who have left over 35,000 comments.  Come join us! Commercial Appraiser - Appraisal Blog.
[ Yahoo! ] options

(David S. Bunton) and John S. Brenan's, Appraisal Foundation

David, (Appraisal Foundation)

 

I have made several demands for information on one of your employees, specifically John S. Brenan.   Under the Freedom of Information Act, I further demand that you provide me a complete copy of your (David S. Bunton) and John S. Brenan's Resume.  You are also formally notified that Mr. John S. Brenan is responsible for the dissemination of information, on the Appraisal Foundation Letter Head, that is contrary to public policy and  professional appraisal practice.  This has lead me to believe that he is incompetent or unqualified for his position. 

 

Additionally I have requested a copy of his job description and a statement of how these letters are relevant to his position, or who authorized there publication and distribution.

 

 

$ Mr. Bunton has served as the senior staff member of The Appraisal Foundation since May of 1990. As President, he is the chief executive officer of the Foundation.  (Think we need TERM LIMITS?)

Prior to joining The Appraisal Foundation, he served as the Vice President of Government Affairs and Communications for the Federal Asset Disposition Association. He also previously served as a legislative assistant in the U.S. Senate for eight years and was a Congressional Chief of Staff in the House of Representatives for four years.

Mr. Bunton holds a BA degree in Government and Politics from the University of Maryland.  (Just what the Appraisal Industry Needs!)

He is presently a member of: The Collateral Risk Network, http://www.collateralrisknetwork.com/speaker_david_bunton.php which  was formed in late 2003 at the first annual Valuation Expo in Orlando, Florida. Attendance was approximately a half dozen or so lenders. Today membership stands at 281 members comprised of Lenders, Government Agencies, Wall Street, Vendor Management Companies, and Appraisers.  (Their main objective is to transfer the bulk of appraisal work away from independent appraisers to Appraiser Management Companies and AVM developers.  Mr. David S. Bunton you are a disgrace to our industry!  Talking about the cat garding the chicken koop. Can we please get some sanity in this profession?)

http://banking.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=41c1c2ff-5353-44e1-b964-39945b6614ce

Your immediate response is appreciated. (appraisal foundation)

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification


The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

 

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

[ Yahoo! ] options

inversecondemnation

inversecondemnation

 

Guest Post: Federal Courts Flashback - Takings And Vested Rights Challenge To Land Use Commission

Posted: 23 Dec 2011 12:01 AM PST

Once again, our old friend and colleague Paul Schwind is following an interesting ongoing case. We've been tracking the "Bridge Aina Le`a" litigation, but have not had the time to digest the latest developments in a comprehensive fashion and Paul attended the recent federal court hearing in the federal phase, and has kindly provided us with the details. 

The litigation is a series of two lawsuits that originated in state court in the Third Circuit (Big Island), one an original jurisdiction civil rights lawsuit, the other an administrative appeal (that's a writ of administrative mandate for you Californians). The State removed the civil rights lawsuit to U.S. District Court in Honolulu and promptly moved to dismiss, and this portion of the case nearly caused us to flash back to our Federal Courts class in law school, since it raised a host of procedural questions such as the effect of removal, whether certain defendants are "persons" under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, whether the federal court must abstain from addressing the federal takings claim, whether there is a state damage remedy for deprivation of constitutional rights, and zoning estoppel under Hawaii law, among others.

Many of these issues were brought about as a result of Hawaii's unusual state-based zoning scheme, whereby all land in the four of Hawaii's five counties that exercise home rule was initially "classified" by the State into one of four classifications (urban, agricultural, rural, conservation). The four counties are allowed to zone the land within the "urban" and "agricultural" districts into the more familiar Euclidean zones that we're familiar with). What most folks would call a "rezoning" is called a "boundary amendment" or "reclassification" when dealing with the State land use designations, and the Land Use Commission is the agency that takes action, not the counties.

With that short background, what follows is Paul's comprehensive look at the cases and the recent court proceedings.

A Primer on the Federal Court Challenge to the State of Hawaii Land Use Commission’s Power to Reclassify Land Upon an Order to Show Cause
 by Paul J. Schwind, Esq.*

Background

A summary of the lengthy and complex factual background in this case begins with the original reclassification of 1,060 acres on the Big Island "agricultural" to "urban" use in 1989, subject to the condition that the original owner develop 60 percent of the proposed 2,760 housing units as "affordable" units. After transfer of the property from Signal Puako Corp. to Puako Hawaii Properties, a limited partnership under Nansay Hawaii, Inc., the LUC Decision and Order was amended in 1991, reducing the project density to 1,560 housing units, provided that no less than 1,000 units be "affordable."

By 1997, PHP had constructed 107 affordable housing units. In November 2005, Bridge Aina Le`a, the successor owner, succeeded in further amending the 1991 D&O to reduce the minimum number of affordable units to 385, although the LUC required that certificates of occupancy be provided for all of these units within five years of the 2005 amendment. In October 2007 the County of Hawaii imposed a new requirement, namely that an environmental impact statement be prepared for plaintiff’s improvements within a public right-of-way, pursuant to Sierra Club v. Dep’t of Transp., 115 Haw. 299, 167 P.3d 292 (2007) (secondary effects of improvements to public transportation infrastructure are not exempt from environmental assessment).

LUC's Order to Show Cause

In December 2008, two years before Bridge’s deadline to provide the 385 affordable housing units, the LUC entered an Order to Show Cause, alleging failure to perform according to the conditions imposed. In April 2009, upon oral motion and voice vote, the LUC acted to reclassify the property to agricultural use. Shortly thereafter, DW Aina Le`a Development moved to become a co-petitioner with Bridge, and to stay entry of the reclassification action, while Bridge moved to rescind the show cause order. In September 2009, the LUC rescinded its previous orders and accepted DW as co-petitioner, but now required as a "condition precedent" that 16 affordable units be completed by March 31, 2010.

Upon the LUC’s request, DW submitted a written status report on June 10 showing its progress on this and other work on the property. Nevertheless, in evident response to comments by the State Office of Planning before and during a hearing on July 1, the LUC voted to keep the prior show cause order "in place," and on July 26 entered an "Order Finding Failure to Meet Condition Precedent for Rescinding Order to Show Cause."

On August 30, 2010, DW filed a Motion to Amend Conditions, and on November 12, Bridge filed a Motion re Order to Show Cause alleging multiple violations by the LUC of relevant statutes and administrative rules. On November 18, 2010 and January 20, 2011, the LUC held hearings on these motions together with the Office of Planning’s motion for a new show cause order. On January 20, the LUC voted 5-3 to reclassify the property back to agricultural use, notwithstanding that six affirmative votes are required for a boundary amendment.

The LUC then voted to deny Bridge’s motion to invalidate the show cause order. On April 25, after meetings earlier that month prior to which the LUC was advised it was exceeding its authority, the LUC executed an order reverting the petition area to agricultural use. 

State Court Complaint, Removal to Federal Court

In its complaint filed on June 7 in state court, Bridge filed suit against the LUC and the commissioners in their official and individual capacities, seeking damages of not less than $35.7 million and injunctive relief to allow it to continue developing the property. The State’s motion to dismiss, filed in federal court on July 27, 2011, after removal of the case on June 27, does not [and cannot, under court rules] contest the facts alleged by Bridge, and there is no separate answer that does so.

State's Motion to Dismiss

The State’s legal defenses against the federal and state law claims may be summarized as follows:

§ The LUC Commissioners are entitled to judicial immunity in their individual capacity as to claims for injunctive relief, and neither they in their official capacity nor the LUC itself are "persons" under § 1983 as to claims for damages for deprivation of constitutional rights.  

§ The federal court should refrain from entering any injunctive relief, pursuant to the abstention doctrines because the plaintiffs' administrative appeal (which was not removed) remains pending in state court. See Railroad Comm'n v. Pullman Co., 312 U.S. 496 (1941) (federal courts, when asked for the extraordinary remedy of injunction, will exercise sound discretion in the public interest to avoid needless friction with state policies); Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971) (possible facial unconstitutionality of a [state] statute does not in itself justify an injunction against good-faith attempts to enforce it, absent any showing of bad faith, harassment, or any other unusual circumstance that would call for equitable relief).  

§ Finally, although the Aina Le`a project had obtained partial final subdivision approval from the County in 2009, the State argues that plaintiff had not received "official assurance" that it may safely proceed under Life of the Land, Inc. v. City Council of the City and County of Honolulu, 61 Haw. 390, 453, 606 P.2d 866, 902 (1980) (equitable estoppel arises when a land developer makes a substantial expenditure in reliance on official assurance of final discretionary approval of his project, such that further necessary ministerial approvals will be forthcoming in due course and he may safely proceed) [for a comprhensive overview on how Hawaii courts apply the vested rights/zoning estoppel tests, see this law review article].

Download the State's motion to dismiss here.

Developer's Arguments

Bridge’s memorandum in opposition argued, inter alia, that under Ninth Circuit law, the LUC Commissioners are entitled to neither absolute judicial immunity nor qualified immunity in their individual capacity, as they act both as lawmakers and monitors of compliance with their own rules and requirements. See Zamsky v. Hansell, 933 F.2d 677 (9th Cir. 1991) (state officials who unconstitutionally cause land to be rezoned are not absolutely immune from liability for the damage caused by their unlawful conduct, when they act in an executive rather than legislative or judicial capacity). Accordingly, Bridge argued it was entitled to seek declaratory and injunctive relief for its takings claim and just compensation for inverse condemnation, including prospective injuctive relief and damages from the Commissioners in their official and individual capacities.

It also argued that the federal court should hear the case and not abstain, because neither the Pullman nor the Younger abstention doctrines apply.  Pullman abstention is inapplicable because (1) the case involves no sensitive area of social policy; (2) plaintiff’s constitutional claims cannot be resolved in the agency appeal; and (3) there is no uncertain state law issue to be resolved. Younger abstention is not applicable because defendants removed the case to federal court. 

Finally, in addressing the vested rights/zoning estoppel claim, Bridge argued that the LUC’s reclassification of the project from agricultural to urban use was the "official assurance" required under Life of the Land, and upon which Bridge relied when incurring millions of dollars in expenses to develop the property.

State's Reply

The State’s reply memorandum began by distinguishing the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission at issue in Zamsky v. Hansell from the Hawaii Land Use Commission. It argued that Bridge’s reliance on Zamsky is misplaced because the LCDC members exercised executive functions, whereas the LUC process is explicitly quasi-judicial. The LUC is expressly authorized by statute to impose conditions and enforce them by way of a show cause order.  The fact that the Commissioners’ actions are under agency review in state court (in the separate administrative appeal) does not militate against absolute judicial immunity in federal court. The State argued that the problem with Bridge’s complaint for injunctive relief is that there is nothing to enjoin – the LUC intended no further action in this case.

The State responded to the developer's argument on absention by asserting that the case presents the Pullman factors: (1) whether the LUC can enforce its conditions is a sensitive issue of social policy and purely a matter of state land use planning law; (2) the constitutional issue (the plaintiffs' taking claim) will unquestionably be eliminated or materially altered upon resolution of the state court agency review; and (3) the final outcome of the state law questions to be resolved in that appeal is anything but certain, presently. abstention is also appropriate because Bridge offers no plausible, non-conclusory facts to support its naked claim that the LUC Commissioners acted on personal and political motivations revealing an irrational and malicious bias.

Finally, Bridge had no "official assurance" to expend funds on its project, because the State’s position is "[y]our development will be permitted provided that you meet conditions relating to affordable housing." [Author's note: this is a classic "Catch 22" – the developer had to expend funds to meet the affordable housing condition, and in effect had to gamble that it could "safely proceed" and receive its "official assurance" after that that expenditure!)

State Court Ruling

Bridge’s and DW’s separate state court agency appeals were consolidated in September in the Third Circuit, and oral argument was heard by Judge Strance on December 16, 2011. On the eve of the federal court hearing on the State's motion to dismiss, the state court concluded that the LUC could not reclassify the land from urban to agricultural, as reported here and here. However, the transcript and final written order in that case are not presently available, so we will have to wait for the details. See DW Aina Le'a Dev. LLC v. Bridge Aina Le'a LLC et al., 3CC11-1-00112K (Haw. 3d Cir., Apr. 7, 2011).

Federal Court Hearing

At the outset of the hearing on the motion to dismiss, U.S. District Judge Susan Oki Mollway asked whether the federal court may exercise jurisdiction over Bridge’s inverse condemnation claim. Prior to the hearing, Judge Mollway circulated to counsel her written inclinations (as is her practice) to dismiss with prejudice most of the action (claims for injunctive relief, money damage claims against the LUC and its Commissioners in their official capacity, and procedural claims against the Commissioners in their individual capacities), for lack of jurisdiction and for absolute judicial immunity. If the claims were not dismissed, the court would abstain and stay those claims pending the outcome of the state court agency appeal. Judge Mollway also asked counsel to come prepared to discuss whether removal of the case affects how the inverse condemnation claim may brought. See   Jachetta v. United States, 653 F.3d 898 (9th Cir. 2011) (in an Alaskan native lands claim, sovereign immunity barred the entire action against the state but only part of the action against the Bureau of Land Management),

During oral argument, Deputy Attorney General William Wynhoff argued for the State that the jurisdictional question raises Eleventh Amendment, Williamson County, and San Remo issues. See, e.g., San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City and County of San Francisco, 545 U.S. 323, 346 (2005) (Williamson County ripeness requirements do not preclude state courts from hearing simultaneously a plaintiff's request for compensation under state law and the claim that, in the alternative, the denial of compensation would violate the Fifth Amendment of the Federal Constitution). Under San Remo, both federal and state takings claims must be brought in state court, but by removal, the State has arguably waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity, so that the federal court now has jurisdiction over the takings claim.  The seeming conflict between Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989) (official capacity state officials are not "persons" under 42 U.S.C. § 1983) and Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) (allowing prospective injunctive relief) is reconciled by the “legal fiction” described in Cardenas v. Anzai, 311 F.3d 929, 935 (9th Cir. 2002). See also Colony Cove Prop., LLC v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2011) (absent factual allegations that reflect action that was arbitrary, irrational, or lacking any reasonable justification in the service of a legitimate government interest, dismissal of an applied substantive due process takings claim [denial of rent increase under a rent control scheme] was appropriate).

Bruce Voss argued for Bridge as respondent that the state claims should be remanded, given Judge Strance’s ruling for Bridge in the state court action. He is concerned about the delay in resolving the takings claim, and would like the state claims remanded to state court while preserving the federal claims for supplemental briefing. He cited to Potrero Hills Landfill, Inc. v. County of Solano, 657 F.3d 876, 889-90 (9th Cir. 2011) (federal courts are not required to send a case to state court if doing so would simply “impose expense and long delay upon the litigants without hope of its bearing fruit,” to the contrary, under such circumstances, "it is the duty of a federal court to decide the federal question when presented to it").

Judge Mollway concluded the hearing by requesting the parties to submit supplemental briefing by February 17, 2012, stating their positions on the question of how the state court's ruling (when available) may affect the issues before the federal court, including the jurisdictional question.

The hearing was continued until March 19, 2012.

----------------------------------------------

*inactive member of the Hawaii Bar



This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

U.S. Law School Curriculum vs. Chinese Law School Curriculum

Posted: 22 Dec 2011 11:46 AM PST

Here is what future lawyers are learning at the flagship U.S. law school: The Evidence Exam at Harvard Law That Requires No Evidence to Pass (via Above the Law).

Here is what future lawyers are learning at one of the premiere Chinese law schools:

IMG_5446



It's Others' Property, You Just "Own" It*

Posted: 22 Dec 2011 11:31 AM PST

Harmon

In Landlord’s Uphill Fight to Ease Rent Restrictions, The New York Times reports on the Harmon cert petition (we posted the petition and the amici briefs in that case here), a challenge to New York City's rent control ordinance.

We won't rehash our thoughts on the case, but wanted to point out what we thought was the most revealing passage from the Times article:

Mr. Harmon said he had appealed to his assemblywoman, Linda B. Rosenthal, a strong supporter of rent regulations. Ms. Rosenthal said Mr. Harmon had asked for an exception to rent regulations for his building, which she found untenable because it would, she said, extend to thousands of other people in "the vanishing middle class."

"I understand he thinks he could make more money, that he is being deprived," she said. "But I have so many constituents who would willingly trade his problems for theirs."

As for luck, she said, Mr. Harmon was "lucky enough to inherit a town house."

She said her views had nothing to do with the fact that she lives in a rent-regulated apartment, though she added, "If I didn’t, I probably wouldn’t be representing tenants in this district because I couldn’t afford to live in the city."

You see, rent control is designed to even out the way that the Fates distribute luck (especially good luck), and to level the playing field for those who would be willing to "trade up" their problems for the problems of others. We think it sounded better in the original German: "Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen!"

-------------

*with apologies to Dean Martin, who apparently originated the quote about Frank Sinatra: "It's Frank's world, we just live in it."



Trial Lawyers' Amicus Brief In Filarsky: Common Law Did Not Recognize Private Attorney Immunity In 1871

Posted: 22 Dec 2011 09:28 AM PST

Here's the amicus brief of the American Association for Justice (fka Association of Trial Lawyers of America) supporting the respondent in Filarksy v. Delia, No. 10-1018 (cert. granted Sep. 27, 2011), the case in which the U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether a private lawyer hired by a local government is entitled to claim the same immunities from section 1983 lawsuits as his government-employed counterparts.

Earlier, we filed an amicus brief on behalf of the American Bar Association supporting the petitioner, and other organization also filed briefs in support (posted here). The petitioner's merits brief is posted here. Oral argument is set for January 17, 2012.

More on this case as it becomes available.



This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

 

[ Yahoo! ] options

NY Appellate Court Holds Town Board May Condition Site Plan Approval on Reduction of Size of Proposed Structure Even Where Proposed Size was Dimensionally Compliant with Zoning

New post on LAW OF THE LAND


 


NY Appellate Court Holds Town Board May Condition Site Plan Approval on Reduction of Size of Proposed Structure Even Where Proposed Size was Dimensionally Compliant with Zoning

by Patty Salkin

This case addressed the issue of whether a town’s board of approval had the power to impose a condition that reduced the size of a proposed structure, even when that structure met dimensional code requirements.

Greencove Associates, LLC owned a 5.26 acre parcel of property  in the Town of North Hempstead, New York that was improved by a commercial shopping center. When the shopping center had first been constructed in 1959, a restriction was imposed requiring the maintenance of a landscaped buffer along a portion of the property. Following a 1999 expansion of the shopping center, the Buffer measured, on average, 22 feet in width. In 2010, Greencove sought to expand the shopping center. It submitted an application to the Nassau County Planning Commission for approval to construct a new 10,000-square-foot structure in the southwest corner of the property. As proposed, the structure would encroach on the Buffer, reducing it to a width of four or five feet.

The County Planning Commission recommended approval of the site plan application with a modification reducing the size of the new structure to approximately 6,800 square feet. The Commission said this would “enable the structure to better fit into the irregular-shaped site… while maintaining the existing [B]uffer.”  Eventually the Town Board of the Town of North Hempstead (the “Board”) approved Greencove’s site plan application, with the condition that the size of the proposed structure be reduced to 6,800 square feet. Greencove appealed noting that the proposed 10,000-square-foot building was dimensionally code compliant, and further that the condition requiring a reduction in the size of the building exceed the Board’s powers.

The appellate court held that the challenged condition was within the Board’s power to impose noting that Town Law §274-a(2)(a) authorizes the Board to review site plans based on certain land use elements, including “screening,” “landscaping,” and “dimension of buildings.” Further, the Town Code provides that in making its considerations as to whether or not to approve a site plan, the Board must consider, among other things, “[o]verall impact on the neighborhood, including compatibility of design considerations and adequacy of screening from residential properties.” The court also noted that the Board could impose a condition upon property so long as there was a “reasonable relationship between the problem sought to be alleviated and the application concerning the property.”

Citing the Town Law and Town Code, the court found that the Board had authority to impose the contested condition. The court also found that the contested condition “was a reasonable means of assuring that the existing land buffer, which was designed to screen the adjacent residential neighborhood from the effects of the shopping center, would be preserved.” Thus, although the 10,000-square-foot proposed structure was dimensionally code compliant, it could not be placed on the Property without encroaching on the existing Buffer. The Board’s condition of reduction in the size of the proposed structure had a reasonable relationship to ensuring the shopping center remained screened from the residential neighborhood.

Greencove Associates, LLC v. Town Bd. of Town of North Hempstead, 929 N.Y.S.2d 325 (A.D. 2 Dep’t 9/20/2011)

The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/courts/ad2/calendar/webcal/decisions/2011/D32268.pdf

This abstract is excerpted from the McQuillan Zoning Bulletin, November 10, 2011, vol. 5 no. 21.

Patty Salkin | December 23, 2011 at 1:24 am | Categories: Current Caselaw - New York, Site Plan Review | URL: http://wp.me/p64kE-1x2

Comment

   See all comments

[ Yahoo! ] options

TODAY'S NEWS

 

December 23, 2011

TODAY'S NEWS

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

REDDING: Home buyers will get funding; Shata Lake granted aid for down payments

By David Benda // Shasta Lake's home down payment assistance program has received a $700,000 holiday boost. The community is one of 25 California cities and counties to share $16.1 million from the state Department of Housing and Community Development. The city of Oroville and Glenn County also got money. The money is from the federal HOME Investment Partnership Program, which has been made available to California communities every year since 1992.

 

HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE: S.D. home permits soared in November

By Roger Showley // San Diego County housing permit activity soared in November to levels not seen in six years, the Construction Research Board reported Thursday. There were 586 units authorized last month, nearly four times the 154 approved in November 2010. It was the highest November number since 2005, when 801 units got the go-ahead. Last month’s count also was nearly three times October’s 198 units

 

EXAMINER: November housing starts: multifamily starts surge in western US

By Ryan McMaken // The West census region includes California, so given the size of the West census region, the fact that total housing starts are at 12,200 indicates that new home construction continues to be very light throughout the region. Housing starts totals ranging from 35,000 to 45,000 were common from 2004 to 2006. However, most of this decline was driven by drops in single-family activity, and not by large drops in multifamily activity.

 

HOUSING MARKETS / REAL ESTATE

BUSINESS WEEK: Foreclosures Weighing on Prices May Push Rebound to 2013

By John Gittelsohn [12/22/11] // (Bloomberg) -- The two-bedroom Denver row house that Kyle and Jennifer Zinth bought in 2005 is a tight fit now that they have an 18-month-old son, Max, and a coonhound named Beauregard. They plan to put it up for sale next month, hoping to at least break even so they can buy a larger home. “My understanding is it’s a better time to buy than sell,” Kyle Zinth, 34, a paralegal, said in a telephone interview. “If we can get out of this one without financial harm and get a good deal on the next place, then that’s ideal under present market realities.”

 

MORTGAGE & FORECLOSURE ISSUES

VENTURA COUNTY STAR: Number of homes pending foreclosure drops nationwide

By Carol Lawrence // October's nationwide shadow inventory of homes dropped nearly 16 percent to 1.6 million from 1.9 million, according to Santa Ana real estate industry tracker and analyst CoreLogic Inc. Shadow inventory is considered a look into the pending foreclosure market because it includes properties not yet on the market but that are at least 90 days late on mortgage payments, those already in foreclosure and homes owned by lenders, as defined by CoreLogic.

 

SACRAMENTO BUSINESS JOURNAL: Local home-value loss pegged at $13 billion

Sacramento homeowners lost a cumulative $13 billion in home value this year, according to figures released Thursday by Zillow, the online real estate company that offers “zestimates” of home values across the country. It was the sixth straight year that homes in the region lost value, the company said.

 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

Fresno, Kings counties land housing funds

Nearly $3 million in funding for housing assistance is coming to two Central Valley counties. The awards are part of a total of $16.1 million released by the Department of Housing and Community Development in Sacramento to 25 cities across the state. The money can be used for housing rehabilitation, homebuyer down payment assistance and tenant-based rental assistance, according to a news release.

 

ECONOMY / EMPLOYMENT

SACRAMENTO BEE: Californians seeking out of state jobs find it tough

By Phillip Reese // Escape isn't easy. As California buckled under layoffs and hiring freezes last year, tens of thousands of residents saw lower unemployment rates in other states and decided to move. Many couldn't find jobs near their new homes either.

The unemployment rate in 2010 among former Californians who had left the state during the previous 12 months was 19 percent, according to a Bee analysis of new U.S. census data. By comparison, the unemployment rate in the state they left behind was 12 percent.

 

NATIONAL HOUSING NEWS

LOS ANGELES TIMES: State sues for answers from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac on housing meltdown

By Alejandro Lazo // California Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris is suing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to force the mortgage giants to answer questions about their role in California's housing meltdown. In two suits filed Tuesday in San Francisco County Superior Court, Harris seeks to compel the companies to respond to subpoenas from her office that have been ignored so far. Harris is seeking information about the practices by Fannie and Freddie in California as part of her ongoing investigation into the mortgage industry.

 

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TIMES: 10 trends in U.S. housing in 2011 and what to look for in 2012

By Roland Li // As the end of 2011 approaches, the housing market is another year removed from the subprime mortgage meltdown. But the legacy of the crash remains, as homeowners, lenders, regulators and brokers alike continue to deal with falling home prices, a glut of unprocessed foreclosures and an uncertain economy. There have been recent signs that the industry is rebounding, but many concerns remain.

 

POPULATION

BLOOMBERG BUSINESS WEEK: U.S. population migrates from coasts for 'gigantic' income boost

By Brian Chappatta // New York, California and other high- cost U.S. states may lose residents as the economy recovers, continuing a trend during the past decade of Americans searching for more affordable regions to settle. The U.S. population climbed 9.7 percent from 2000 to 2010, according to Census Bureau data. Five states -- Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Utah and Idaho -- grew at more than twice the national pace, as California, the most-populous, had its smallest increase ever, the data show.

 

ENVIRONMENT / CLIMATE CHANGE

VANCOUVER STRAIGHT: Demand for Smoke-free housing on the rise in Metro Vancouver

By Carlito Pablo // California’s Sonoma County is going to be the envy of Lower Mainland residents who have to put up with the secondhand smoke of their neighbours. Starting on May 10 next year, all new multi-unit residences in the county will be smoke-free. Then, as of January 12, 2013, the ban will extend to all existing multiple-dwelling units like apartments and condos. While Sonoma’s smoking prohibition may appear to be too ambitious for Canadian jurisdictions, a more modest approach could work.

 

[ Yahoo! ] options

December 22, 2011

Yet another tax reform proposal targets discounts for lack of marketability–at least for non-business assets

BVWire News

 

Yet another tax reform proposal targets discounts for lack of marketability–at least for non-business assets

Posted: 20 Dec 2011 11:11 AM PST

The latest tax reform proposal, which Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) introduced last month as the “Sensible Estate Tax Act  of 2011,” would raise the maximum estate and gift tax rate to 55% and lower the  applicable exclusion amount to $1 million. It would also eliminate valuation discounts on investment assets, such that:

the value of any nonbusiness assets held by the [passive] entity shall be determined as if the transferor had transferred such assets directly to the  transferee (and no valuation discount shall be allowed with respect to such nonbusiness assets).

Few authorities predict that H.R. 3467 will pass as currently drafted. However, most pundits agree that tax reform in 2012 is as certain as—well—taxes, and that any proposal will attempt to capture the enormous wealth transfer of aging baby boomers. Stay tuned…


 


 

[ Yahoo! ] options

Appraiser Qualifications Board Public Meeting Summary

Appraiser Qualifications Board

Public Meeting Summary

December 9, 2011

On December 9, the Appraiser Qualifications Board (AQB) held its fourth public meeting of 2011. The meeting

was held in Houston, Texas. The primary focus of both the public meeting and work sessions included

ongoing projects associated with the:

 

Fifth Exposure Draft of Proposed Revisions to the Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria

 

USPAP Courses and USPAP Instructor Program

 

National Uniform Licensing and Certification Examinations

 

Undergraduate/Graduate Degree in Real Estate Review Program

 

Course Approval Program

Fifth Exposure Draft of Proposed Revisions to the

 

Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria

On October 27, 2011, the Appraiser Qualifications Board (AQB) released the Fifth Exposure Draft of Proposed

Revisions to the

 

Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria (Criteria). The AQB accepted written and oral

comments on the exposure draft and based on feedback received, adopted the proposed revisions contained in

the exposure draft. The following changes to the Criteria will take effect for individuals seeking a real

property appraiser credential as of January 1, 2015 (unless adopted earlier by a particular state or jurisdiction):

 

Education and experience must be completed prior to taking the National Uniform Licensing and

Certification Examinations

 

 

;

 

Applicants for the Certified Residential and Certified General classifications must have a Bachelor’s

degree or higher from an accredited college or university;

 

Applicants for the Licensed Residential classification shall successfully complete 30 semester hours of

college-level education from an accredited college, junior college, community college, or university

 

or

have an Associate’s degree or higher from an accredited college, junior college, community college, or

university;

 

All candidates must undergo a background check;

 

Recognition of university degree programs as counting toward the education requirements in the Real

Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria

 

 

;

 

Removal of the “Segmented” Approach to the Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria

implementation;

 

Prohibition of repetitive continuing education in the same continuing education cycle;

 

Clarification of the term “written examination;”

 

Revisions to the Trainee Appraiser classification that include a requirement to take a course oriented to

the requirements and responsibilities of Trainee Appraisers and Supervisory Appraisers;

 

New Supervisory Appraiser requirements;

Appraiser Qualifications Board

Public Meeting Summary

December 9, 2011

Page 2 of 3

1155 15

 

th Street, NW, Suite 1111 2

Washington, DC 20005

T 202.347.7722

F 202.347.7727

 

Revisions to Guide Note 1; and

 

Additions to the illustrative list of educational topics acceptable for continuing education.

A copy of the new

 

Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria effective January 1, 2015 will be forthcoming in

the weeks ahead. In the meantime, to review the exposure draft and related comments, please visit The

Appraisal Foundation website at:

http://netforum.avectra.com/eWeb/DynamicPage.aspx?Site=TAF&WebCode=AQBDrafts

USPAP Courses and USPAP Instructor Program

The 7-Hour and 15-Hour versions of the

 

National USPAP Course are currently available. Additionally, the AQB

is accepting applications for equivalency review and approval from providers who wish to develop their own

USPAP courses. For further information, please visit our website at:

https://netforum.avectra.com/eWeb/DynamicPage.aspx?Site=TAF&WebCode=EquivalentCourse2012

The Instructor Recertification Course (IRC) is currently available online. All Certified USPAP Instructors must

recertify prior to teaching the 2012-13 USPAP courses. Additionally, all instructors must recertify prior to

March 31, 2012, or will be required to re-take the Instructor Certification Course (ICC) and successfully

complete the accompanying examination. For more information on taking the IRC, please contact Mavis Kleso

at

 

mavis@appraisalfoundation.org.

The ICC will be offered once next year during the first six months of 2012. For more information, please

contact Mavis Kleso at

 

mavis@appraisalfoundation.org.

National Uniform Licensing and Certification Examinations

The AQB continues to monitor the

 

National Uniform Licensing and Certification Examinations and the applicable

pass/fail rates. Based on data obtained through January – October 2011, the average pass rate for first-time

test takers has gone up significantly since 2008.

Additional information regarding the new examinations, including statistics on pass rates from 2008-10, as

well as Q&As and sample questions, is available on the Foundation’s website, by visiting the following link:

http://netforum.avectra.com/eWeb/DynamicPage.aspx?Site=TAF&WebCode=NULCE

Appraiser Qualifications Board

Public Meeting Summary

December 9, 2011

Page 3 of 3

1155 15

 

th Street, NW, Suite 1111 3

Washington, DC 20005

T 202.347.7722

F 202.347.7727

Undergraduate/Graduate Degree Review Program in Real Estate

In 2009, the Appraisal Subcommittee provided The Appraisal Foundation with funding to review graduate

degree programs in real estate for equivalency with the education required in the

 

Real Property Appraiser

Qualification Criteria

 

 

. The AQB conducted on-site reviews at two institutions and has approved educational

hours for the programs at the University of Denver and Texas A&M. Details on these approved graduate

degree programs can be found on The Appraisal Foundation’s website.

In 2011, the AQB began accepting applications to review undergraduate degree programs in real estate

 

 

 

. This

service is provided at no cost to accredited colleges and universities. Further information is available on The

Appraisal Foundation’s website at:

http://netforum.avectra.com/eweb/DynamicPage.aspx?Site=TAF&WebCode=DegreeProgram

At their last meeting, the Board approved the first undergraduate degree program at the University of Denver.

Details about the approved program can be found on The Appraisal Foundation’s website.

Course Approval Program (CAP)

The Course Approval Program (CAP) continues to expand with 335 courses currently CAP-approved.

AQB Public Meetings Scheduled for 2012:

April 20, 2012 Chicago, Illinois

September 14, 2012 Dallas, Texas

[ Yahoo! ] options

The Appraiser Qualifications Board (AQB) has issued the following Summary of its Meeting on December 9, 2011 in Houston, Texas:

The Appraiser Qualifications Board (AQB) has issued the following Summary of its Meeting on December 9, 2011 in Houston, Texas:

Appraiser Qualifications Board Public Meeting Summary - Houston - December 9, 2011 

 

Direct Link: https://appraisalfoundation.sharefile.com/d/s5d82d7356934541a

Questions?  Please contact Magdalene Vasquez, Qualifications Administrator at 202.624.3074. 

 

The Appraisal Practices Board (APB) has issued the following Summary of its Meeting on December 12, 2011 in Atlanta, Georgia:

Appraisal Practices Board Public Meeting Summary - Atlanta - December 12, 2011

Direct Link: https://appraisalfoundation.sharefile.com/d/s73a5ed98ee144bcb

Questions?
  Please contact Staci Steward, Practices Administrator at 202.624.3052.


Exposure Drafts 

Events/Meeting Registration

[ Yahoo! ] options

Construction Law

Legal Updates by JD Supra

December 22, 2011

Construction Law

Building Profits -- It Ain’t Easy Building Green

A number of state and municipal governments (and in some cases, even the federal government) have incorporated – to varying extents – requirements that new...more

by Duane Morris LLP

 

Always Get Your Change Orders in Writing

Christopher Hill, LEED AP and VA construction lawyer discusses the necessity of written change orders on a construction project in Virginia. Courts in...more

by Christopher G. Hill

 

Ready-Mix Delivery Companies and Their Drivers Are Not Engaged In The Building and Construction Industry Under Labor Law

Under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or labor law), employers engaged in the building and construction industry are privileged to enter into a limited...more

by Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

 

2012 California Construction Law Update

With the new year comes a host of changes to laws impacting the construction industry in California. Addressed below are some of the most important new laws to...more

by Farella Braun + Martel LLP

 

California Anti-Indemnity Statutes and Contractual Additional Insured Requirements

Contractual agreements between owners and general contractors and/or between general contractors and subcontractors routinely include “indemnity” and/or...more

by Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

 

California, Colorado and Arizona Lead the Nation in Total Solar Jobs Nationally as Renewable Energy Sector Soars

While the construction industry has suffered tremendously over the last few years, one bright spot has been renewable energy. The Solar Foundation recently...more

by Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

 

Tenth Circuit Weighs In On Continuing Saga Of What Construction Defects Are An Occurrence Under Colorado CGL Policies

As previously reported in Under Construction, in 2009 the Colorado Court of Appeals held in General Security v. Mountain States Mutual that “a claim for...more

by Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

 

Arbitration in California Construction Defect Cases - After AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion

The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. ___, 131 S.Ct. 1740 (2011) (Concepcion) has engendered considerable...more

by Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

 

The Effective Use of Internet Deposition Streaming Services

When an attorney’s caseload is packed, and they have multiple depositions in different locations on the same day, this technology literally allows a busy...more

by DepoTexas

 

The 2011 Texas Legislature Tightens Indemnity Rights and Changes Mechanic's Lien Perfection Requirements

The 82nd Regular Session of the Texas Legislature dealt with many issues related to construction projects in Texas, including sustainable design building...more

by Sedgwick LLP

 

Blissful California Dreamin' Interrupted, Less Likely After Opinski and Other Recent Extra Work Cases

Contractors looking for gold in California will have to mine harder these days to find it in public works construction contracts after Greg Opinski, P&D...more

by Sedgwick LLP

 

Weekly Law Resume - December 15, 2011: Premises Liability–Independent Contractors and Pre-existing Hazardous Condition

Gary Gravelin v. Paul Satterfield, et al. Court of Appeal, First District (November 15, 2011) This case considered whether homeowners are liable for...more

by Low, Ball & Lynch

See more Construction Law articles »

 


 

[ Yahoo! ] options

5th Circuit Court of Appeals Dismisses Regulatory Takings and Spot Zoning Challenges to Adult Business Ordinance in Unpublished Opinion

 

 

New post on LAW OF THE LAND


 


5th Circuit Court of Appeals Dismisses Regulatory Takings and Spot Zoning Challenges to Adult Business Ordinance in Unpublished Opinion

by Patty Salkin

In September 2010, the Jefferson Parish Council passed zoning regulations and design standards for stand-alone bars and other businesses in a neighborhood of Metairie, Louisiana, known as “Fat City.”  The Ordinance targeted noise levels, security, parking, and aesthetics at adult-oriented establishments in the Fat City neighborhood, due to concerns about “higher crime rates, negative influences on children, physical blight and reduced property values.”  The Ordinance set a curfew for bars of midnight every day except Fridays and Saturdays, when bars must close by 1 a.m., and a requirement that bars not reopen the next morning until 11 a.m. or later.  In addition, bars were required to installed 24-hour time lapse surveillance cameras; remove litter found within 200 feet of their property lines; remove graffiti within 48 hours; maintain vegetation according to the Ordinance; install soundproofing; and report suspicious activity to law enforcement. 

Bar and business owners impacted by the Ordinance challenged its validity in two separate suits, combined here, claiming it was a regulatory taking of property and a violation of owners’ rights to substantive due process and equal protection.  The owners sought injunctive relief permanently barring the enforcement of the ordinance, as well as monetary and punitive damages and costs.  The Parish filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, which was granted by the district court.  The plaintiffs here appeal. 

The Fifth Circuit held that the business owners’ claims of both per se taking and a regulatory taking failed.  There was no per se taking because the plaintiffs failed to show that the regulation had resulted in permanent physical invasion of their property or that it had deprived them of all economically beneficial use of their land.  Using the balancing test set forth in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York, 438 U.S. 104 (1978), the court held that the plaintiffs had also failed to plead a plausible claim of unconstitutional taking, noting that “the limitations imposed by the Ordinance might have some adverse economic effect on Appellants’ businesses . . . [however], most of Appellants’ possessory rights are left intact under the Ordinance.”  The court held that, since business owners were still able to operate their bars and sell alcohol therein, they had not been sufficiently deprived of property rights sufficient to make a takings claim. 

As to both the equal protection and due process claims, the court disagreed with the business owners’ claims that the Ordinance lacked a rational basis.  The court followed Shelton v. City of College Station, 780 F.2d 475 (5th Cir. 1986), which stated that “a zoning decision violates substantive due process only if there is ‘no conceivable rational basis’ under which the government might have based its decision.”  Since the Ordinance was passed in order to “enhance property values, promote economic development, and provide identity and a sense of community for Fat City,” the court felt there was a sufficient rational basis. 

Finally, the business owners claimed they had been subjected to “spot zoning,” arguing that the Parish had arbitrarily and capriciously singled out a small area of Fat City to target in the Ordinance, while other businesses outside of the four targeted blocks would not be subject to such regulations.  However, the court noted that zoning ordinances often involve drawing seemingly arbitrary geographical boundary lines, which in itself was not a basis for claiming an equal protection violation.  In order to prove spot zoning has occurred, the plaintiff would have had to prove either that there was a suspect classification at play, or that the zoning had been implemented for the sole or primary benefit of a particular party.  The court held that the plaintiffs had failed to show any obvious beneficiary of the Ordinance, other than the community at large, or that individual owners were targeted through a suspect classification.  

For all of those reasons, the court affirmed that the district court had acted properly in dismissing the business owners’ case. 

Yur-Mar, L.L.C. v. Jefferson Parish Council, 2011 WL 5840265 (5th Cir. 11/21/2011). 

The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/11/11-30196.0.wpd.pdf

Patty Salkin | December 22, 2011 at 1:06 am | Categories: Adult Entertainment Facilities, Current Caselaw | URL: http://wp.me/p64kE-1xi

Comment

   See all comments

[ Yahoo! ] options

December 21, 2011

"Father Forgive Them (John S. Brenan) For They Know Not What They DO!"

"Father Forgive Them (John S. Brenan) For They Know Not What They DO!"

 

The following article written by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) is spot-on.  It was followed up by communicate from John S. Brenan of the Appraisal Foundation/Institute (forgive me but most times it is hard to tell them apart) which for the most part is rambling and incoherent.  Why is it so hard for these imbeciles to understand that in order to measure "MARKET VALUE" YOU NEED "MARKET SALES!!!!!"  I have requested a copy or John S. Brenan's resume so that we can get to the bottom of this issue once and for all.   http://www.icapweb.com/upload/121311%20NAHB%20Response.pdf  He obviously does not understand Real Estate or Real Estate Markets.

 

Home > Newsroom > Flawed Appraisals Killing Home Sales, Hampering Housing Recovery

Flawed Appraisals Killing

Home Sales, Hampering

Housing Recovery

Normal View

December 8, 2011 - One out of three builders are reporting losing signed sales contracts during the

preceding six months because appraisals on their homes are less than the contract sales price, according to

a recent nationwide survey conducted by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB).

“The inappropriate use of distressed and foreclosed sales as comparables in determining new home values is

needlessly driving down home prices, killing home sales, causing more workers to lose their jobs and

delaying a housing and economic recovery,” said NAHB Chairman Bob Nielsen, a home builder from Reno,

Nev.

 

Too often, due to faulty appraisal practices, brand new homes with sparkling appliances and interior

upgrades get compared to a distressed property that has been sitting vacant and in disrepair. The result, in

many cases has been that the new house winds up getting appraised at less than the cost of construction.

That is precisely what is occurring in today’s marketplace, according to the NAHB survey, where a full 60

percent of respondents reported they were experiencing appraisals coming in below their contract sales

price.

Of those reporting that they had encountered this problem, 53 percent said the appraisal amount was actually

less than the cost of building the home.

“This is not only unfair and unreasonable, but it perpetuates the cycle of declining home values, drives more

home owners underwater, harms local economic activity and acts as an obstacle to the recovery of the

housing market,” said Nielsen.

 

These appraisal practices are a major contributing factor to the current acquisition, development and

construction (AD&C) lending crisis that has choked off credit for home builders and threatens to prolong the

current housing downturn.

Falling appraised values for land and subdivisions under development have led some financial institutions to

stop lending to developers and builders, to demand additional equity and even to call performing loans.

Since Sept. 2009, NAHB has held four appraisal summits in Washington with representatives of federal

banking regulators, the appraisal industry, the housing finance industry, the real estate and housing sectors

and others to find solutions that will allow appraisers to develop realistic valuations based on sales that are

truly comparable.

 

The need to give top priority to addressing the complexity of property valuations in distressed markets and

impediments to the flow of appropriate information on homes between appraisers and interested parties was

discussed during the most recent summit, which occurred on Oct. 19.

 

“Major reforms in appraisal practices and oversight are needed to ensure that appraisals accurately reflect

true market values and don’t contribute to price volatility or harm aspiring home owners and move-up

buyers,” said Nielsen. “We will continue to work with all stakeholders in this debate to find solutions.”

With the decline in home prices appearing to have ended or be coming to an end in most parts of the country,

resolving the appraisal and credit crunch issues remain a top priority for the association.

NAHB’s latest Improving Markets Index has shown modest signs of improvement in scattered housing

markets where employment is gaining and distressed properties are not as numerous.

New-home construction stands ready to serve as an engine for economic recovery. Building 100 single-family

homes creates more than 300 full-time jobs and provides $8.9 million in federal, state and local tax

revenues.

 

“Resolving inappropriate appraisal practices and restoring the flow of credit to home builders will not only help

to put America back to work, it will provide badly needed tax revenues that is essential for local governments

to support schools, police and firefighters in communities across the land,” said Nielsen.

 

Thanks!
Curtis D. Harris, BS, CGREA, REB
Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, CSULA
State Certified General Appraiser
Real Estate Broker
ASTM E-2018 Commercial Real Estate Inspector
HUD 203k Consultant
HUD/FHA Real Estate Appraiser/Reviewer
FannieMae REO Consultant

CTAC LEED Certification

The Harris Company, Forensic Appraisers and Real Estate Consultants
*PIRS/Harris Company and the Science of Real Estate-Partners*

1910 East Mariposa Avenue, Suite 115
El Segundo, CA. 90245
310-337-1973 Office
310-251-3959 Cell

WebSite: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com

Resume: http://www.harriscompanyrec.com/CURRICULUMVITAENAME2011a.pdf

Commercial Appraiser Blog: http://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/

 

We Make a Simple Pledge to

Communicate, in a timely fashion, each appraisal, analysis, and opinion without bias or partiality

Abstain from behavior that is deleterious to our clients, the appraisal profession, and the public

Hold paramount the confidential nature of the appraiser/consultant - client relationship

and

Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the
Code of Professional Ethics of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers

 

IT'S THE LAW-Designation Discrimination is Illegal [FIRREA, Sec. 564.6]: Professional Association Membership http://www.orea.ca.gov/html/fed_regs.shtml#Statement7 Membership in an appraisal organization: A State Certified General Appraiser may not be excluded from consideration for an assignment for a federally related transaction by virtue of membership or lack of membership in any particular appraisal organization, including the appraisal institute.

 

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to consultant/appraiser-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please destroy all copies received and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal

[ Yahoo! ] options

December 20, 2011

mai Stephen J. Vertin Exposes the appraisal institute ineptitude

"mai Stephen J. Vertin Exposes the appraisal institute ineptitude

THEY (ai, mai, appraisal institute) HAS BEEN IN BUSINESS SINCE DEBACLE I AND ARE JUST NOW GETTING AROUND TO TEACHING THEIR MEMBERS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REAL AND PERSONAL pROPERTY, REDICulious!!!  Aparently this course is very similar to all their courses, short on facts and long on theory, i.e. just made up stuff.

Stephen J. Vertin, MAI's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: 203 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2100, Chicago, Illinois
State: Illinois
Professional Status: Certified General Appraiser
Posts: 2,187
DefaultFundamentals of Separating Real and Personal Property

"Last week I took the new AI course Fundamentals of Separating Real and Personal Property from Intangible Business Assets. I did not put this in the educational forum section since it applies heavily to commercial work.

I believe this is the future in AI's development into business valuation. They promise courses will follow. It makes sense since many future businesses will not have real estate and the fact of 2014 changing accounting standards. You would not believe the sentiment that the future of RE appraising is doomed because of existing and coming governmental regulations.

The class was heavy in theory. If you are looking for a calculator class this is not it. It is great for understanding the basics and a must for appraisers doing real estate appraisals with intangible components. I applaud the effort to unite terminology covering some of the most basic issues used in most general practices. A must do in 2012 for those who have not taken it. Further it is required for SBA loans on such properties. The Chicago class last week was the second given."
[ Yahoo! ] options

Vol. 3, No. 2 December 2011 Appraiser Qualifications Board

Vol. 3, No. 2 December 2011

Appraiser Qualifications Board

Q&A

Vol. 3, No. 2 December 2011

The Appraiser Qualifications Board (AQB) of The Appraisal Foundation establishes the minimum education, experience and examination requirements for real property appraisers to obtain a state license or certification. The AQB Q&A is a form of guidance issued by the AQB to respond to questions raised by appraisers, enforcement officials, users of appraisal services and the public to illustrate the applicability of the Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria and Interpretations of the Criteria in specific situations and to offer advice from the AQB for the resolution of appraisal issues and problems. The AQB Q&A may not represent the only possible solution to the issues discussed nor may the advice provided be applied equally to seemingly similar situations. AQB Q&A does not establish new Criteria. AQB Q&A is not part of the Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria. AQB Q&A is approved by the AQB without public exposure and comment.

General Requirements

Question:

I would like to get a Certified General appraiser credential. I am from another country and have a student visa, but don't have a Social Security card or Taxpayer ID Number. If I fulfill the education and experience requirements, can I get a Certified General appraiser credential without possessing a Social Security card or similar document?

Response:

The

 

Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria does not specifically address residency, citizenship or identification issues. However, be sure to check with the state appraiser regulatory agency in the state where you plan to seek the credential to confirm the state’s requirements for licensure, as states may have their own residency or citizenship requirements.Appraiser Qualifications Board Q&A Page 2 of 5 Vol. 3, No. 2 December 2011

Experience

Question:

I am an Appraiser Trainee working towards my license. If I do not sign an appraisal report due to my company’s policies or a client’s assignment conditions, what verbiage is required in the report in order for the time I spent on the appraisal to count toward the experience requirements in the

 

Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria?

Response:

If you provide significant real property appraisal assistance for a supervisory appraiser but do not sign the report certification, your supervisory appraiser must disclose that you provided significant real property appraisal assistance within the certification of the report. In addition, the supervisory appraiser must describe the extent of your assistance in the report (refer to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice [USPAP], Standards Rules 2-2 and 2-3, as well as Advisory Opinion 31,

 

Assignments Involving More Than One Appraiser, for additional details).

Furthermore, the experience log you submit to your state appraiser regulatory agency must describe the work you performed in support of the hours of experience you claim for each assignment. Documentation in the form of reports, certifications, or file memoranda, or other evidence that the time you spent on the appraisal process is compliant with USPAP must be provided as part of the state experience verification process to support the experience claimed.

Qualifying Education

Question 1:

I am a state regulator responsible for evaluating courses submitted for qualifying education for state appraiser licensure and certification. I recently received a submission of a course entitled "Advanced Residential Applications and Case Studies." I reviewed Guide Note 1 of the

 

Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria and understand one of the subtopics for this course is "Advanced Case Studies." What qualifies a case study as "advanced?"

Response:

An

 

Advanced Residential Applications and Case Studies course should serve to provide the student with practical instruction demonstrating how to handle complex and high-value residential properties.Appraiser Qualifications Board Q&A Page 3 of 5 Vol. 3, No. 2 December 2011

Guide Note 1 of the Criteria provides curriculum guidance including the following subtopics for this course:

A. Complex Property, Ownership and Market Conditions

B. Deriving and Supporting Adjustments

C. Residential Market Analysis

D. Advanced Case Studies

Thus, the case studies in this type of course should include issues dealing with complex and/or high-value residential properties such as:

• Atypical properties in a given market;

• Residences with unique architecture or historic properties;

• Properties which may be stigmatized due to internal or external circumstances; and/or

• Properties of such value and/or unusual characteristics that their competitive market may be regional as opposed to an immediate neighborhood.

Other advanced case study topics could include complex ownership situations, such as the appraisal of fractional interests in a property; material dealing with more complex market conditions such as declining neighborhoods within a generally improving market; properties affected by a government acquisition program; or properties within markets which may be impacted by foreclosure sales or tax sales.

Advanced case studies may involve advanced statistical analysis; appropriate handling of unusual sales concessions; atypical markets; and markets with scarce data.

Please be advised that the above is not meant to be an exhaustive list of possible topics for

 

Advanced Residential Applications and Case Studies. Course developers are encouraged to explore a variety of topics relevant to complex residential issues in order to differentiate an Advanced Residential Applications and Case Study course from more basic level course topics.

Question 2:

I am an Appraiser Trainee preparing to get my Certified Residential credential. For my initial qualifying education to become a Trainee, I completed 80 hours of

 

Basic Appraisal Principles and Procedures in 2003 from a proprietary school that no longer exists. My state appraiser regulatory agency said any courses taken before January 1, 2008 were no longer considered valid according to the AQB. Why can’t these original hours count toward the qualifying education requirement for my Certified Residential credential?Appraiser Qualifications Board Q&A Page 4 of 5 Vol. 3, No. 2 December 2011

Response:

The current edition of the

 

Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria went into effect January 1, 2008. However, the Criteria do not contain any provision that invalidates qualifying education successfully completed prior to that date. As with all AQB Criteria, states may create requirements that are more restrictive; if so, you’ll need to clarify this with your state. From the AQB’s perspective, courses that were eligible in 2003 would remain valid towards the 2008 Criteria.

Question 3:

I have been a commercial real estate professional for over 21 years, have my broker’s license and am a Certified Commercial Investment Member (CCIM). I am interested in pursuing a Certified General real property appraiser credential. I would prefer to do my education on my own time with an online educator. I have my Bachelor’s degree in business from a state university. With my licensing, education, and experience, is there a way to "fast track" the required coursework?

Response:

Many qualifying education (QE) courses required under the

 

Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria are available online. Your state appraiser regulatory agency maintains a list of approved QE courses and providers. Also, it is possible your university may have sought and received QE approval from your state appraiser regulatory agency for some of the courses you took when earning your degree.

Alternatively, some of the education you completed for your other real estate credentials/designations might be approved by your state appraiser regulatory agency as real property appraiser QE. If so, you may already have some of the 300 hours of required QE for the Certified General credential completed.

Continuing Education

Question:

I am a certified appraiser in a state with a 2-year licensure cycle. As such, I am required to complete 28 hours of approved continuing education (CE) in order to be eligible to renew my certification. If I complete more than the required 28 hours, can I carryover the extra hours to my next certification renewal?

Response:

The

 

Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria (2008) does not provide for any carryover of CE hours from one renewal period to the next. Specifically, under Section F. Criteria Specific to Continuing Education, Item 11 requires the instruction for which CE is sought to take place "…during the period preceding the renewal."Appraiser Qualifications Board Q&A Page 5 of 5 Vol. 3, No. 2 December 2011

The AQB Q&A is posted on The Appraisal Foundation website (

 

www.appraisalfoundation.org)

For further information regarding

AQB Q&A, please contact:

John S. Brenan, Director of Appraisal Issues

The Appraisal Foundation

1155 15

 

th Street, NW, Suite 1111

Washington, DC 20005

(202) 624-3044

(202) 347-7727 fax

john@appraisalfoundation.org

[ Yahoo! ] options

 

Chapter Meeting

Join us Tuesday, January 17TH, 2011 at  

        Fixtures Living new showroom in Costa Mesa   


 

Fixtures Costa Mesa


      

     

 

Happy New Year!


 

Register by January 3, 2012 for the January 17th meeting at Fixtures Living, Costa Mesa, and take advantage of our special beginning of the year meeting price! Members who register by January 3rd will get the major discount meeting price of $25! Student members who register by January 3rd will only be $10! There's more!   Click here for more information and to register now. 

   

Celebrate the New Year at the Fixtures Living Showroomin Costa Mesa, where you will be spoiled with a feast of heavy appetizers, beer on tap and some delicious wines from 6:00-7:30. Take a tour of the living showroom and be amazed. From 7:30 to 8:30, learn about the wellness, therapies, and technologies associated with water in the CEU presentation, Synergy withWater: Wellness, Therapy, Rejuvenation. Then from 8:30-9:00 PM we'll wrap it up with dessert and a raffle for some great prizes.

 


 


 

[ Yahoo! ] options

New Jersey Appellate Court Overturns City Council Resolution Based on Attorney’s Conflict of Interest

New post on LAW OF THE LAND


 


New Jersey Appellate Court Overturns City Council Resolution Based on Attorney’s Conflict of Interest

by Patty Salkin

The plaintiff, Kane Properties sought variances before purchasing a parcel of land to build a twelve-story residential building and also a day care center in an area zoned purely industrial.  Skyline Condominium Association opposed the variances.  After several hearings, the Hoboken Board of Adjustments decided to grant the variance.  They found, from testimony offered by Kane, that it was difficult to have an industrial building on the property because of the extensive residential units surrounding the area.  The board ultimately concluded that the city’s zoning was outdated and not allowing a variance would result in the property becoming unusable.                          

Skyline appealed the board’s decision to the city council.  Two weeks after the board’s decision, however, Skyline’s attorney, Michael Kates, was appointed corporation counsel for the city of Hoboken.  Although Kates discontinued representation of Skyline for the appeal and was only at the city for a short time, there was some overlapping time where the board heard the appeal and Kates was employed as corporate counsel. 

During the appeal, plaintff Kane objected to Kates continuing as the advising council for the matter and, subsequently, Kates recued himself.  After Edward Buzak took over as council for this case, however, Kates remained involved.  Kates exchanged memorandum with Buzak regarding how to handle general zoning appeals and   Buzak referenced this memo to his own advice letter regarding the Kane matter, even “cc”ing Kates.  

After hearing evidence, the city council voted to grant the variance for the day care and deny all others.  After the decision but before concluding the process, the city council held a meeting to edit and finalize the resolution; Buzak was not present at this meeting but Kates was.  Besides giving advice, Kates also signed and approved the final resolution which denied most of the variances. 

This decision was appealed by Kane to the New Jersey appellate division.  Kane argued that he was entitled to the variance as matter of law and also that the decision was tainted by the participation of Kates.  First, the court explains that it must give deference through a presumption of validity to the city council’s holding, not the board’s holding.  Given this presumption and the evidence showing that the case was basically a policy dispute, the court decides the city council’s decision was reasonable and Kane was not entitled  not prevail as a matter of law. 

Next, the court turns to whether Kates’ participation tainted the board’s decision.  The court begins by asserting that Kates certainly had a conflict of interest.  His representation of Skyline in the past  meant Kates could not ethically provide advice regarding this appeal.  Next, the court finds that through the memos, presence and advice at the meeting, and finally signing the resolution, Kates, continued to participate both directly and indirectly in the proceedings. 

The court explains that the inquiry is whether a reasonable citizen would find “an appearance of improper influence.”  Here, the court is worried that an appearance of impropriety would discourage citizens from trusting the board’s decisions.  The court asserts, however, that not all conflicts will require a new hearing.  Here, the relevant facts are that the case could have gone either way and that all parties agreed the zoning laws were outdated.  These facts combined could lead residents to believe the city was forcing developers to apply for zoning ordinances so they could “reserve that relief for the politically well-connected.”  Thus, given these facts and the probability of public concern, Kates, finds the court, should have been screened completely from the application.  It was improper for Kates to give any advice, to be present during the meeting, and especially to sign the resolution. 

The court holds that the city council’s resolution must be vacated and remands the case.  Since, however, the record from the board was obtained before any conflict of interest, the court clarifies that it is not ordering new evidentiary hearings.  The city council must allow new oral arguments and reconsider the appeal as if they had never heard it before. 

Kane Properties, LLC v. City of Hoboken, 30 A.3d 348 (N.J. Super. A.D. 11/16/2011) 

This opinion can be accessed at: http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a3903-10.opn.html


 


 

Patty Salkin | December 20, 2011 at 1:20 am | Categories: Current Caselaw, Ethics | URL: http://wp.me/p64kE-1xb

Comment

   See all comments

[ Yahoo! ] options

Thursday: Using financial experts in Delaware Chancery

Law Alert | December 6, 2011 | www.BusinessValuationLaw.com | Issue 28-1

Thursday: Using financial experts in Delaware Chancery Court

To keep up with this important precedent from the “Supreme Court” of corporation law, don’t miss Delaware Chancery Roundtable: Views from the Bench, Council & Witness Stand. In this special two-hour webinar, Neil Beaton (Grant Thornton) and Kevin Shannon (Potter Anderson & Corroon) will ask Vice Chancellor Donald F. Parsons Jr. what the Delaware Court of Chancery expects from financial experts, their valuation methods, conclusions, and credibility. The session starts December 8th at 1 PM ET.

Court approves expert’s use of "rules of thumb"

Most courts have expected expert witnesses to provide documented "comparables" when calculating the value of a business in dispute. So it's noteworthy that a source which averages "rules of thumb" multiples by industry has just been accepted in a recent California divorce. This may give your financial experts more latitude in supporting their conclusions of business value.

In the case, a joint expert valued the husband’s physical therapy practice between $450,000 and $550,000, using a multiplier of roughly .42 derived from the Business Reference Guide: The Essential Guide to Pricing a Business (BRG) (Business Brokerage Press), an excerpt of which he attached to his report. The trial court approved the source but adjusted the expert’s multiplier upward to 1.0 based on the firm’s historic growth rates, good location, and well-established clientele.

On appeal, the husband challenged the trial court’s reliance on the BRG for: 1) lack of foundation for the author’s expertise; 2) lack of evidence that the joint expert included the BRG’s method in his appraisal or that the court understood it; and 3) lack of support that the BRG method was “reasonable.” The husband also claimed that the negative factors underlying the joint expert’s selection of a lower multiplier were more credible. The appellate court rejected all these reasons, finding that the BRG was a reliable method used by an “undisputed” expert. Read the complete digest of In re Marriage of Bauer, 2011 WL 4337093 (Cal. App.)(Sept. 16, 2011) in the Dec. 2011 Business Valuation Update; the court’s unpublished opinion is currently posted at BVLaw.

New updates to BRG: In addition, BVR has just received the new Business Reference Guide online, in which 65% of the content was just updated—including its sections on Industry Trends, Rules of Thumb, Pricing Tops, General Information, and Expert Comments. Benefits of subscribing to the BRG Online include: 1) the ability to search for businesses using keywords and SIC codes; 2) access to continual updates throughout the year; 3) ease of adding BRG data to reports; 4) access to current industry reports, and more.

Tax Court is equally as likely to throw out IRS or taxpayer experts, professors argue

New academic research suggests that there may be more behind a Tax Court estate tax valuation than simply “splitting the baby,” and it’s not just the increasing sophistication of the court, counsel, and BV experts. Using models from prior literature as well as an updated data set, the authors of the just-posted article “Asset and Business Valuation in Estate Tax Cases: the Role of the Courts” investigated “whether there are certain factors related to the case, the judge, and the economic environment that might influence the judge’s decision.”
What they found: “Evidence . . . suggests that the number of appraisers used by the taxpayer, the gender of the judge, the type of asset being valued, and the size of the U.S. deficit are related to the decision of the court,” conclude Professors Mark Jackson, Sonja Pippin, and Jeffrey Wong, all from the University of Nevada (Reno), who examined 152 decisions from 1986 through 2009. “The court cases indicate that judges sometimes reject the credentials of the taxpayer’s appraiser and other times that of the IRS’s expert,” the authors noted; “we therefore believe that on average each side’s experts are given equal value.”

[ Yahoo! ] options

Petition For Rehearing/En Banc In CCA Associates: Time To "Sort Out" Takings Law

geovisit();<img src="http://visit.webhosting.yahoo.com/visit.gif?us1324070544" alt="setstats" border="0" width="1" height="1">

inversecondemnation

 

Petition For Rehearing/En Banc In CCA Associates: Time To "Sort Out" Takings Law

Posted: 19 Dec 2011 03:16 PM PST

Count us in the "not surprised" column: the property owners have sought a panel rehearing or a rehearing en banc from the Federal Circuit in CCA Associates v. United States, No. 2010-5100 -5101 (Nov. 21, 2011).

The petition for rehearing asserts

If any case cried out for en banc review, this is the one. The decisions of this Circuit regarding the effect of the ELIHPA and LIHPRHA statutes are in conflict, not only with each other, but also with settled law on regulatory takings and contract formation. The panel majority acknowledged this conflict but held that it had no choice but to follow the Court's decisions in Cienega Gardens v. United States, 503 F.3d 1266 (Fed. Cir. 2007) ("Cienega X") and Ciegega Gardens v. United States, 194 F.3d 1231 (Fed Cir. 1998) ("Cienega IV").

The exceptionally important issues presented by this petition, including the very viability of temporary regulatory takings in this Circuit, demand uniformity, not conflicting case law. Four years ago, the Court of Federal Claims ("COFC") bemoaned, after issuance of the Cienega X decision: "[W]hen you get to Cienega X and you still don't know what to do as a Trial Judge, that's a problem, and somebody needs to sort it out. It's beyond this Court's pay grade to do that." Trans. at 20-21, Independence Park v. United States, No. 94-10001C (Fed. Cl. Oct 25, 2007). The conflict created by Cienega X still has not been "sorted out," as confirmed by the panel decision, and will not be sorted out until this Court accepts en banc review.

Petition at 2-3 (footnotes omitted).

If the Federal Circuit doesn't do something to "sort it out," will the Supremes? Stay tuned.

Petition for Rehearing/En Banc, CCA Assoc v. United States, No. 2010-5100, -5101 (filed Dec 8 2011)  



This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now