Source: https://harriscompanyrec.com/blog/2008/01/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 23:12:12+00:00

Document:
housing legislation, and housing trust funds.
difference at the local, county, and state levels.
As of January 2008, Selection based upon the following datagories: Relivence, Ease of Use, Response Time. Google and Yahoo have slipped as a result of there competition with the online Yellow Pages.
The Land Use, Construction and Housing committee seeks to generate sound policy decisions that will help the region accommodate dramatic population growth in the next decade, particularly as it relates to housing and urban planning to promote more livable and economically sustainable communities. This months special guest will be L.A. City Council President Eric Garcetti.
While the credit crunch and economic uncertainty have caused investor anxiety and tighter lending standards, commercial real estate (CRE) remains comparatively attractive with solid underlying fundamentals, plentiful capital and sustained allocations. Deloitte recently released its 2008 capital markets Top Ten Issues report. The report provides insight about commercial real estate market trends, over the short and long term, through a review of critical issues, an examination of the industry’s core fundamentals and an analysis of underlying factors.
Read the full report attached below.
Top ten issues report. PDF; 44 pages.
Selling And Leasing With TICs And Partnerships: Do You Have All Of The Signatures You Need?
Are you contemplating entering into a real estate transaction with individuals who own the real property as tenants in common ("TICs") or with a partnership? If so, a recent California case, Elias Real Estate, LLC v. Tseng, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 360, (Cal.App. 2 Dist., 2007) ("Tseng"), contains a relevant discussion of the effect of the interplay between the statute of frauds and the law of agency on your real estate transaction. Below is a brief review of the Tseng case and some actions to consider taking in your real estate transaction.
Tseng involved the listing and sale of commercial real property in San Pedro , California owned by four brothers as TICs. One of the four brothers listed the property with a real estate broker pursuant to a written listing agreement and subsequently entered into a written purchase agreement for the property with the buyer. Both the listing agent and the buyer knew that he was not the sole owner of the property but did not request or obtain documentation that he was authorized to act on behalf of the other brothers and relied solely on his assurances of his authority. After calling his brothers to "verify" that they still wanted to sell the property, he informed the broker that they had decided not to sell the property. The buyer sued the brothers for specific performance (the completion of the purchase of the property), and the brothers cross-complained against the buyer and the broker. The trial court entered judgment for the buyer and the broker, and the brothers appealed.
misstatements, as added by § 1219 of the Pension Protection Act of 2006, Pub. L. No.
109-280, 120 Stat. 780 (2006) (the “PPA”).
comply with the new provisions added by § 1219 of the PPA.
by § 883 of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-357, 118 Stat.
appraiser” for purposes of § 170(f)(11).
respect to returns filed after August 17, 2006.
requirements as may be prescribed by the Secretary in regulations or other guidance.
Just in time for the holidays, the Court of Appeal offered landowners a present in the on-going date-of-value controversy in eminent domain, undercutting the seemingly bright-line rule established earlier last year by the California Supreme Court. San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board v. RV Communities (December 21, 2007) ___ Cal.App.4th ____ 2007 DJDAR 18826 was one of the cases stayed by the California Supreme Court pending last year’s ruling in Mt. San Jacinto Community College District v. Superior Court (Azusa Pacific) (2007) 40 Cal.4th 648.
The Mt. San Jacinto case sought to clarify the long-standing debate over the appropriate date of value, especially in cases where the value changed dramatically between the date of deposit and the date of trial. In Mt. San Jacinto, the California Supreme Court held that the date of deposit controlled. The Court also held that existing procedural safeguards that provide landowners a right to seek an increase in the amount of the deposit adequately protects their interests. With this decision, it appeared that the date of value issue was resolved with a bright-line, easy to apply rule.
Months later, the court in Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Diego v. Mesdaq (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 1111 confirmed this view, applying the rule established in Mt. San Jacinto to set the date of value as the date of deposit in the face of arguments that the trial court did not rule that the deposit reflected the probable amount of compensation, that property values increased dramatically, and that the case was not brought to trial within a year.
A few weeks ago, however, the court in San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board v. RV Communities provided a new twist, holding that the date of deposit does not qualify as the date of value where the condemning agency subsequently concedes that the initial deposit amount was too low. The court reasoned that since the agency voluntarily increased its deposit (thereby implicitly acknowledging that it was inadequate), the Mt. San Jacinto rule did not apply, and the appropriate date of value was the trial date.
In September 2001, the plaintiff filed a condemnation action to take property owned by RV Communities. Plaintiff also sought to condemn a temporary construction easement on another portion to the RV Communities’ property. Plaintiff made an initial deposit of probable compensation in the amount of $79,357 based on an appraisal with a date of value five months before the action was filed. In 2003, RV Communities moved for an increase in the deposit to $300,300 and to have the date of value set as the date of trial. Before the hearing on the motion, Plaintiff voluntarily made an additional deposit which increased to deposit to the $300,300 requested. The trial court granted to motion to make the trial date the date of value. At trial, the jury awarded $1,132,866 for the land taken in fee simple and $576,267 for the land held to have been taken by inverse condemnation, plus other amounts. Plaintiff appealed, and the Court of Appeal affirmed. Plaintiff then sought review by the California Supreme Court, which suspended proceedings while deciding the Mt. San Jacinto case.
After the Court issued the Mt. San Jacinto opinion, it appeared likely that the RV Communities case would be reversed, and that, just as in Mesdaq, the court would apply Mt. San Jacinto and hold that the date of value was the date of deposit. But this is not what happened. Instead, the Court of Appeal again ruled in favor of RV Communities.
The RV Communities court distinguished Mt. San Jacinto on the grounds that Plaintiff’s $79,357 deposit was based on an appraisal with a valuation date five months before the date of deposit and that the appraiser who provided the original appraisal later testified that the value of the property at the time of the deposit had increased to $300,300. However, the court’s rationale is not necessarily limited to these facts. Instead, the court appears to hold that if it is later found that the deposit did not constitute just compensation (as subsequently determined), the deposit is not sufficient to set the date of value.
Unless narrowly construed, the decision may well run afoul of Mt. San Jacinto. If construed as limited to the unusual circumstances of a deposit being based on an out of date appraisal and the later recanting by the appraiser to the effect that the value is significantly higher as of the deposit date; it may fall outside the Mt. San Jacinto rule. However, if construed as meaning that a deposit does not freeze the date of value whenever it is later determined that the amount deposited did not equal just compensation on the date of deposit, it is difficult to see how the decision comports with Mt. San Jacinto.
It seems likely Plaintiff will again petition for hearing by the California Supreme Court. The Supreme Court may not want entertain another condemnation case so soon after its decision in Mr. San Jacinto, but it could simply order the case depublished. Stay tuned.
Jim Powers specializes in representing public agencies in condemnation matters and is one of California's leading experts in condemnation. He has served as lead trial counsel at dozens of trials. He can be reached at jpowers@nossaman.com or (213) 612-7835.
SUBJECT : Real estate appraisals.
connection with a mortgage loan.
a) Consider additional, appropriate property information.
c) Correct errors in the appraisal report.
conclusion generated by the appraisal.
Licensing and Certification Law (REALCL).
the transaction for which the appraisal was made.
against those that inappropriately pressure appraisers to "hit"
established, recognized standards, free from outside pressures.
accepted standards of professional appraisal practice.
licensing and enforcement program consistent with federal law.
has played a role in mortgage fraud.
Numerous RCA staff and leaders will also participate in the WebEx and will be on hand to describe RCA committees and opportunities.
This interactive WebEx conference will provide you with useful information that give you the tools you need to get your name in for the 2009 self-nomination process. Whether you are looking to get involved with NAR, RCA, or just simply want to know how the "system" works, then attend this session. You will leave this session with the answers. Don’t delay, sign up today!
Location: From home, your office or anywhere you have a computer, phone and internet connection.
How to Participate: Call Rita Baldwin at 888-648-8321 or send an email to rbaldwin@realtors.org and let us know you want to participate. You will receive an email confirmation from WebEx with a link to register for the presentation and call and be provided with participation instructions.
Statement 7: Prohibition Against DiscriminationState agencies should be aware that Title XI and the Agencies' regulations prohibit federally regulated financial institutions from excluding appraisers from consideration for an assignment solely by virtue of their membership, or lack of membership, in any appraisal organization. Federally regulated financial institutions should review the qualifications of appraisers to ensure that they are qualified for the assignment for which they are being considered. It is unacceptable to assume that an appraiser is qualified solely due to membership in, or designation from, an appraisal organization, or the lack thereof. The Agencies have determined that financial institutions' appraisal policies should not favor appraisers from one or more organizations or exclude individuals based on their lack of such membership. If a State agency learns that a certified or licensed appraiser allegedly has been a victim of such discrimination, the State agency should inform the Agency which has regulatory authority over the involved financial institution.
The ASC has determined that such discrimination also is inappropriate in the establishment and administration of a State's certification and licensing system. The ASC urges States to adopt legislation, regulations or other procedures to prohibit such discriminatory practices.
In addition, State agencies should avoid discriminatory practices regarding appraiser educational course providers. Some State agencies inappropriately: (1) have charged a course review fee to private course providers while not charging such a fee to certain professional appraiser organizations; (2) have delayed approval of private school appraisal courses while rapidly approving those of professional appraiser organizations; and (3) have forced non-affiliated proprietary schools to maintain and use fixed school room locat1ons, while certain professional appraisal organizations have been allowed to teach courses at non-fixed commercial sites, such as hotels, motels and office locat1ons. State agencies should review their internal procedures and take steps to ensure that all educational providers are afforded equal treatment in all respects, including course review fees, timeliness of review and course locat1on requirements.
The Congress for the New Urbanism was founded in 1993 by a group of enthusiastic architects. They had each worked for years to create buildings, neighborhoods, and regions that provide a high quality of life for all residents, while protecting the natural environment. They were brought together by Peter Katz, who soon became the first Executive Director of CNU.
Later that year, CNU held its first annual Congress. A satisfying 100 people showed up, demonstrating that the issues of urbanism were important, if not widely discussed.
Today, CNU has over 3,100 members in 20 countries and 49 states. Federal cabinet secretaries (such as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Andrew Cuomo) and state governors (such as former Maryland Governor Parris Glendening) are proud to call themselves New Urbanists, and are promoting policies to make cities and towns more livable than ever. Over 1100 people attended CNU IX in New York City in June of 2001. Though the movement has drawn criticism from much of the architectural academy, the ideas behind CNU's Charter have been gradually integrated into the curriculum at the top planning and architecture schools.
More importantly, there are now over 210 New Urbanist developments under construction or complete in the United States. Real estate in these developments often sells at a premium compared to conventional sprawl.
The name CNU comes from the Congresses we sponsor, annual gatherings which bring together members of every field related to development. At Congresses, architects, landscape architects, planners, economists, real estate agents and developers, lawyers, government officials, educators, citizen activists, and students discuss issues related to the health and vitality of regions, towns, and neighborhoods.
As outlined in the preamble to our Charter, CNU advocates the restructuring of public policy and development practices to support the restoration of existing urban centers and towns within coherent metropolitan regions. We stand for the reconfiguration of sprawling suburbs into communities of real neighborhoods and diverse districts, the conservation of natural environments, and the preservation of our built legacy.
Rebuilding neighborhoods, cities, and regions is profoundly interdisciplinary. We believe that community, economics, environment, and design need to be addressed simultaneously through urban design and planning.
CNU is a membership organization. CNU members undertake much of the organization's work through task forces. CNU's projects, whether organized by task forces or by staff, are called initiatives.

References: v. 
 § 1219
 § 1219
 § 883
 § 170
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.