Tag Archives: California

Is This A Solution To California’s Housing Crisis, Or Threat To Single Family Homes?

Could this be the end of single-family zoning in California?

Changes to the comprehensive housing measure Senate Bill 50 – already hotly debated – allow property owners broad rights to turn single-family homes and vacant lots into two-, three- and four-unit homes and apartments.

Continue reading


C.A.R. Report: California Housing Market Sputtered In November

California Association Of Realtors Report, Absent Seasonal Adjustments

– Existing, single-family home sales totaled 381,400 in November on a seasonally adjusted annualized rate, down 3.9 percent from October and down 13.4 percent from November 2017.

– November’s statewide median home price was $554,760, down 3.0 percent from October and up 1.5 percent from November 2017.

– Statewide active listings rose for the eighth straight month, increasing 31 percent from the previous year.

– The statewide Unsold Inventory Index was 3.7 months in November, up from 3.6 months in October.

– As of November, year-to-date sales were down 4.6 percent.


LOS ANGELES (Dec. 18) – California home sales remained on a downward trend for the seventh consecutive month in November as prospective buyers continued to wait out the market, according to the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (C.A.R.).  

Closed escrow sales of existing, single-family detached homes in California totaled a seasonally adjusted annualized rate of 381,400 units in November, according to information collected by C.A.R. from more than 90 local REALTOR® associations and MLS’ statewide. The statewide annualized sales figure represents what would be the total number of homes sold during 2018 if sales maintained the November pace throughout the year. It is adjusted to account for seasonal factors that typically influence home sales.

November’s sales figure was down 3.9 percent from the revised 397,060 level in October and down 13.4 percent from home sales in November 2017 of a revised 440,340. November marked the fourth month in a row that sales were below 400,000.

“While many home buyers continue to sit on the sidelines, serious buyers who are in a position to purchase should take advantage of this window of opportunity,” said C.A.R. President Jared Martin. “Now that interest rates have pulled back, home prices have tapered, and inventory has improved, home buyers’ prospects of getting into a home are more positive.”

The statewide median home price declined to $554,760 in November. The November statewide median price was down 3.0 percent from $572,000 in October and up 1.5 percent from a revised $546,820 in November 2017.

“The slowdown in price growth is occurring throughout the state, including regions that have strong economic fundamentals such as the San Francisco Bay Area,” said C.A.R. Senior Vice President and Chief Economist Leslie Appleton-Young. “The deceleration in home price appreciation should be a welcome sign for potential buyers who have struggled in recent years against low inventory and rapidly rising home prices.” 

Other key points from C.A.R.’s November 2018 resale housing report include:

  • On a region wide, non-seasonally adjusted basis, sales dropped double-digits on a year-over-year basis in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Coast, and the Southern California regions, while the Central Valley region experienced a relatively small sales dip of 3.9 percent.
  • Forty-one of the 51 counties reported by C.A.R. posted a sales decline in November with an average year-over-year sales decline of 16.8 percent. Twenty-six counties recorded double-digit sales drops on an annual basis.
  • Sales for the San Francisco Bay Area as a whole fell 11.5 percent from a year ago. All nine Bay Area counties recorded annual sales decreases, with Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Sonoma counties posting double-digit annual declines.
  • The Los Angeles Metro region posted a year-over-year sales drop of 10.1 percent, as home sales fell 11.2 percent in Los Angeles County and 14.4 percent in Orange County.
  • Home sales in the Inland Empire decreased 6.7 percent from a year ago as Riverside and San Bernardino counties posted annual sales declines of 9.0 percent and 3.2 percent, respectively.
  • Home prices in the San Francisco Bay Area are no longer climbing at the double-digit pace that occurred throughout much of this year. On a year-over-year basis, the Bay Area median price ticked up 0.6 percent from November 2017. While home prices in Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties continued to remain above $1 million, all but San Mateo County recorded a year-over-year price decline.
  • Statewide active listings rose for the eighth consecutive month after nearly three straight years of declines, increasing 31 percent from the previous year. November’s listings increase was the largest since April 2014.
  • The unsold inventory index, which is a ratio of inventory over sales, increased year-to-year from 2.9 months in November 2017 to 3.7 months in November 2018. The index measures the number of months it would take to sell the supply of homes on the market at the current sales rate.
  • The median number of days it took to sell a California single-family home edged up from 22 days in November 2017 to 28 days in November 2018.
  • C.A.R.’s statewide sales price-to-list-price ratio* declined from a year ago at 98.9 percent in November 2017 to 97.9 percent in November 2018.
  • The average statewide price per square foot** for an existing, single-family home statewide was $282 in November 2018, up from $277 in November 2017.
  • The 30-year, fixed-mortgage interest rate averaged 4.87 percent in November, up from 3.92 percent in November 2017, according to Freddie Mac. The five-year, adjustable mortgage interest rate also increased in November to an average of 4.11 percent from 3.24 from November 2017.

Key Graphics (click links to open):

Note: The County MLS median price and sales data in the tables are generated from a survey of more than 90 associations of REALTORS® throughout the state and represent statistics of existing single-family detached homes only. County sales data are not adjusted to account for seasonal factors that can influence home sales. Movements in sales prices should not be interpreted as changes in the cost of a standard home. The median price is where half sold for more and half sold for less; medians are more typical than average prices, which are skewed by a relatively small share of transactions at either the lower-end or the upper-end. Median prices can be influenced by changes in cost, as well as changes in the characteristics and the size of homes sold. The change in median prices should not be construed as actual price changes in specific homes.

*Sales-to-list price ratio is an indicator that reflects the negotiation power of home buyers and home sellers under current market conditions. The ratio is calculated by dividing the final sales price of a property by its last list price and is expressed as a percentage.  A sales-to-list ratio with 100 percent or above suggests that the property sold for more than the list price, and a ratio below 100 percent indicates that the price sold below the asking price.

**Price per square foot is a measure commonly used by real estate agents and brokers to determine how much a square foot of space a buyer will pay for a property.  It is calculated as the sale price of the home divided by the number of finished square feet.  C.A.R. currently tracks price-per-square foot statistics for 50 counties.

Leading the way…® in California real estate for more than 110 years, the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (www.car.org) is one of the largest state trade organizations in the United States with more than 190,000 members dedicated to the advancement of professionalism in real estate. C.A.R. is headquartered in Los Angeles.

# # #

November 2018 County Sales and Price Activity
(Regional and condo sales data not seasonally adjusted)

November 2018 Median Sold Price of Existing Single-Family Homes Sales
State/Region/County Nov.






  Price MTM% Chg Price YTY% Chg Sales MTM% Chg Sales YTY% Chg
Calif. Single-family home $554,760 $572,000   $546,820   -3.0% 1.5% -3.9% -13.4%
Calif. Condo/Townhome $465,770 $476,440   $451,250   -2.2% 3.2% -19.1% -17.4%
Los Angeles Metro Area $512,000 $516,000   $500,500   -0.8% 2.3% -14.0% -10.1%
Central Coast $672,500 $669,500   $685,000   0.4% -1.8% -15.9% -18.0%
Central Valley $320,000 $320,000   $310,000   0.0% 3.2% -11.7% -3.9%
Inland Empire $363,620 $359,000   $340,000   1.3% 6.9% -12.2% -6.7%
San Francisco Bay Area $905,000 $958,800   $900,000 r -5.6% 0.6% -12.7% -11.5%
San Francisco Bay Area                  
Alameda $900,000 $900,000   $880,000   0.0% 2.3% -10.9% -6.7%
Contra Costa $641,000 $657,000   $615,000   -2.4% 4.2% -5.8% -8.0%
Marin $1,172,940 $1,450,000   $1,230,000   -19.1% -4.6% -25.7% -26.8%
Napa $683,500 $709,500   $682,000   -3.7% 0.2% -11.5% -6.1%
San Francisco $1,442,500 $1,600,000   $1,500,000   -9.8% -3.8% -14.0% -12.2%
San Mateo $1,500,000 $1,588,000   $1,486,000   -5.5% 0.9% -22.1% -13.7%
Santa Clara $1,250,000 $1,290,000   $1,282,500   -3.1% -2.5% -10.9% -9.9%
Solano $450,000 $430,000   $410,000   4.7% 9.8% -2.7% -3.6%
Sonoma $612,500 $650,000   $655,000   -5.8% -6.5% -25.5% -29.1%
Southern California                  
Los Angeles $553,940 $614,500   $530,920   -9.9% 4.3% -17.5% -11.2%
Orange $795,000 $810,000   $785,000   -1.9% 1.3% -7.5% -14.4%
Riverside $400,000 $400,000   $383,000   0.0% 4.4% -14.8% -9.0%
San Bernardino $299,450 $289,000   $280,000   3.6% 6.9% -8.0% -3.2%
San Diego $626,000 $635,500   $619,900   -1.5% 1.0% -8.4% -11.0%
Ventura $643,740 $650,000   $640,000   -1.0% 0.6% -18.8% -11.7%
Central Coast                  
Monterey $630,000 $620,000   $618,120   1.6% 1.9% -6.1% -11.2%
San Luis Obispo $624,000 $586,000   $615,000   6.5% 1.5% -14.4% -17.5%
Santa Barbara $550,000 $659,000   $742,000   -16.5% -25.9% -20.3% -18.8%
Santa Cruz $862,500 $885,000   $870,000   -2.5% -0.9% -24.0% -26.1%
Central Valley                  
Fresno $265,750 $272,000   $264,000   -2.3% 0.7% -6.4% -2.9%
Glenn $225,000 $253,000   $232,000   -11.1% -3.0% 12.5% -5.3%
Kern $235,250 $240,000   $235,000   -2.0% 0.1% -14.8% -1.8%
Kings $222,000 $229,000   $230,000   -3.1% -3.5% -3.4% 6.3%
Madera $265,000 $254,950   $245,000   3.9% 8.2% 2.1% -2.0%
Merced $261,930 $271,850 r $255,000   -3.6% 2.7% -22.5% -13.0%
Placer $461,000 $470,000   $450,000   -1.9% 2.4% -5.1% -13.6%
Sacramento $365,000 $360,000   $349,900   1.4% 4.3% -10.2% -7.1%
San Benito $583,200 $597,000   $649,880   -2.3% -10.3% -4.3% 10.0%
San Joaquin $365,000 $369,200   $360,500   -1.1% 1.2% -20.1% 17.5%
Stanislaus $310,000 $319,000   $298,750   -2.8% 3.8% -17.2% -9.2%
Tulare $237,400 $232,000   $215,000   2.3% 10.4% -16.2% -2.5%
Other Calif. Counties                  
Amador NA NA   $348,950   NA NA NA NA
Butte $326,940 $318,000   $315,000   2.8% 3.8% -7.1% 8.3%
Calaveras $325,000 $302,500   $318,000   7.4% 2.2% -33.6% -31.9%
Del Norte $250,000 $223,000   $214,000   12.1% 16.8% -20.0% -42.9%
El Dorado $461,750 $500,000   $470,000   -7.7% -1.8% -28.6% -27.5%
Humboldt $310,000 $315,000   $310,000   -1.6% 0.0% -24.0% 3.2%
Lake $255,000 $265,250   $262,000   -3.9% -2.7% -11.4% -23.5%
Lassen $184,000 $148,000   $189,000   24.3% -2.6% -40.0% -48.3%
Mariposa $355,000 $305,500   $250,000   16.2% 42.0% -12.5% 180.0%
Mendocino $414,000 $420,000   $374,500   -1.4% 10.5% -13.1% 6.0%
Mono $725,000 $599,900   $400,000   20.9% 81.3% -47.1% -35.7%
Nevada $399,000 $401,500   $405,750   -0.6% -1.7% -30.6% -13.9%
Plumas $289,500 $310,000   $302,000   -6.6% -4.1% -44.7% -42.2%
Shasta $283,000 $261,000   $250,000   8.4% 13.2% -17.2% 7.1%
Siskiyou $226,000 $181,500   $189,500   24.5% 19.3% -19.6% -15.9%
Sutter $296,000 $290,000   $270,000   2.1% 9.6% -16.9% -14.7%
Tehama $199,000 $233,250   $224,500   -14.7% -11.4% -38.1% -46.9%
Tuolumne $288,500 $304,000   $325,000   -5.1% -11.2% -15.4% -9.6%
Yolo $429,500 $443,750   $440,000   -3.2% -2.4% -12.5% -26.3%
Yuba $263,000 $282,000   $285,000   -6.7% -7.7% -1.3% 14.5%

r = revised
NA = not available

November 2018 County Unsold Inventory and Days on Market
(Regional and condo sales data not seasonally adjusted)

November 2018 Unsold Inventory Index Median Time on Market
State/Region/County Nov. 2018 Oct. 2018   Nov. 2017   Nov. 2018 Oct. 2018   Nov. 2017  
Calif. Single-family home 3.7 3.6   2.9   28.0 26.0   22.0  
Calif. Condo/Townhome 3.4 3.1   2.2   25.0 21.0   17.0  
Los Angeles Metro Area 4.2 4.0 3.3   32.0 30.0   27.0  
Central Coast 4.4 4.1   3.4   34.0 30.0   30.0  
Central Valley 3.3 3.3   2.9   25.0 21.0   18.0  
Inland Empire 4.7 4.3   3.9   37.0 35.0   31.0  
San Francisco Bay Area 2.3 2.5   1.5   23.0 19.0   15.0  
San Francisco Bay Area                    
Alameda 1.9 2.1   1.2   17.0 15.0   13.0  
Contra Costa 2.2 2.6   1.7   19.0 16.0   14.0  
Marin 3.0 3.0   1.6   35.0 22.0   36.0  
Napa 4.6 5.0   3.8   49.0 41.0   57.5  
San Francisco 1.7 1.9   1.1   16.5 15.0   16.0  
San Mateo 1.9 1.9   1.2   16.0 12.0   12.0  
Santa Clara 2.1 2.4   1.2   18.0 14.0   9.0  
Solano 3.0 3.4   2.4   41.0 39.0   32.5  
Sonoma 3.8 3.3   1.7   49.0 47.5   44.0  
Southern California                    
Los Angeles 3.9 3.7   2.9   27.0 25.0   22.0 r
Orange 3.9 4.1   2.8   28.0 29.0   24.0  
Riverside 4.9 4.3   3.9   36.0 34.0   29.0  
San Bernardino 4.3 4.3   3.9   42.0 35.0   34.0  
San Diego 3.9 3.9   2.7   22.0 24.0   17.0  
Ventura 5.4 5.1   4.4   53.0 51.0   51.0  
Central Coast                    
Monterey 4.3 4.4   3.8   25.0 25.0   28.0  
San Luis Obispo 4.6 4.3   3.7   40.0 29.0   30.0  
Santa Barbara 5.2 4.5   3.7   41.0 40.0   35.0  
Santa Cruz 3.2 3.1   2.2   30.5 21.0   22.5  
Central Valley                    
Fresno 3.5 3.6 r 3.0   19.0 19.0   18.0  
Glenn 4.8 4.9   3.8   73.5 22.5   45.0  
Kern 3.1 2.9   3.3   26.0 21.0   25.0  
Kings 3.5 3.8   3.5   23.5 26.0   16.0  
Madera 5.1 5.7 r 4.4 r 34.0 30.0   28.0  
Merced 4.8 3.7   3.6   23.0 22.0   25.0  
Placer 3.0 3.4   2.3   27.0 25.0   17.0  
Sacramento 2.7 2.8   2.3   24.0 19.0   17.0  
San Benito 3.1 3.6   4.1   41.5 23.0   23.5  
San Joaquin 3.6 3.1   2.9   24.0 22.0   14.0  
Stanislaus 3.3 3.1   2.6   25.0 21.0   18.0  
Tulare 4.1 3.6   3.9   35.0 28.0   29.5  
Other Counties in California                    
Amador NA NA   5.4   NA NA   69.0  
Butte 2.9 3.3   2.8   24.0 21.0   18.0  
Calaveras 6.5 4.7   4.3   53.0 43.5   60.0  
Del Norte 5.6 5.0   4.0   110.0 95.0   111.0  
El Dorado 4.4 3.6   2.7   41.5 48.0   40.0  
Humboldt 5.8 4.9   5.3   24.5 27.0   28.0  
Lake 7.0 6.7   4.7   60.5 51.0   54.0  
Lassen 8.6 6.1   5.0   110.0 109.0   85.0  
Mariposa 4.8 4.6   12.2   147.0 24.0   6.0  
Mendocino 7.9 7.3   5.7   66.0 87.0   63.5  
Mono 8.4 4.8   4.9   127.0 115.0   153.5  
Nevada 5.7 4.3   3.9   41.0 40.5   33.0  
Plumas 9.8 6.1   5.1   152.0 87.0   143.0  
Shasta 4.4 3.9   4.3   26.5 34.5   33.0  
Siskiyou 7.1 6.6   5.5   60.5 20.0   60.5  
Sutter 2.9 3.1   3.0   29.5 34.0   32.0  
Tehama 9.2 5.4   4.0   49.5 48.5   63.0  
Tuolumne 5.8 5.6   3.9   58.5 47.0   42.0  
Yolo 3.7 3.7   1.9   27.0 22.0   22.0  
Yuba 2.9 3.0   3.4   30.0 33.0   17.0  

r = revised
NA = not available

Source: California Association Of Realtors

Proposal To Split California Into Three States Earns Spot On November Ballot

3 Californias? Billionaire’s Plan to Split California Into 3 Separate States Clears First Hurdle

California’s 168-year run as a single entity, hugging the continent’s edge for hundreds of miles and sprawling east across mountains and desert, could come to an end next year — as a controversial plan to split the Golden State into three new jurisdictions qualified Tuesday for the Nov. 6 ballot.

If a majority of voters who cast ballots agree, a long and contentious process would begin for three separate states to take the place of California, with one primarily centered around Los Angeles and the other two divvying up the counties to the north and south. Completion of the radical plan — far from certain, given its many hurdles at judicial, state and federal levels — would make history.

It would be the first division of an existing U.S. state since the creation of West Virginia in 1863.

“Three states will get us better infrastructure, better education and lower taxes,” Tim Draper, the Silicon Valley billionaire venture capitalist who sponsored the ballot measure, said in an email to The Times last summer when he formally submitted the proposal. “States will be more accountable to us and can cooperate and compete for citizens.”

Source: by John Myers | Los Angeles Times

Jerry Brown Forbids Landlords from Cooperating with ICE to Deport Illegal Aliens


California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a pair of new laws Thursday designed to protect illegal alien tenants from being threatened with deportation by making it illegal for landlords to report a tenant’s immigration status to Immigrations Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The bills were part of a package of laws pushed by the Democrat majority and signed by Brown ostensibly to protect illegal aliens from any increased enforcement measures under theTrump administration.

According to the Los Angeles Times,

One proposal by Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) would bar landlords from disclosing information about immigration status in order to intimidate, harass or evict tenants without following proper procedures. It also would allow immigrant tenants to file civil claims against their landlords if they do.

Another bill by Assembly Majority Leader Ian Calderon (D-Whittier) would ensure that no state office or entity in California could compel a landlord to obtain and disclose information on a tenant’s immigration status.

The rationale behind the latest package of bills protecting illegal aliens, according to the Sacramento Bee, is fear of enforcement by ICE under President Trump, and fear that unscrupulous landlords might use a tenant’s illegal status to harass, intimidate or abuse them.

Chiu argues that tenants should not have to “live in fear” because they’re immigrants or refugees. He cited the legal uncertainty over young immigrants who were brought to the country illegally but have been educated here and hold down jobs as one of several reasons for the legislation.

“Trump’s escalating war on immigrants is ripping apart families and mass deportations could be our new reality,” Chiu said recently.

“This bill will deter the small minority of landlords who unscrupulously take advantage of the real or perceived immigration status of their tenants to engage in abusive acts.”

With the package of bills signed into law Thursday—including SB54 making California a “Sanctuary State” for criminal aliensCalifornia Democrats have kept their word to put the interests of illegal aliens first, ahead of legal, law-abiding California citizens.

By Assemblyman Tim Donnelly | Breitbart

Required Pension Contributions of California Cities Will Double in Five Years says Policy Institute: Quadruple is More Likely


The California Policy Center estimates Required Pension Contributions Will Nearly Double in 5 Years. I claim it will be much worse.

In the fiscal year beginning in July, local payments to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System will total $5.3 billion and rise to $9.8 billion in fiscal 2023, according to the right-leaning group that examines public pensions.

The increase reflects Calpers’ decision in December to roll back the expected rate of return on its investments. That means the system’s 3,000 cities, counties, school districts and other public agencies will have to put more taxpayer money into the fund because they can’t count as heavily on anticipated investment income to cover future benefit checks.

Including the costs paid by cities and counties that run their own systems, the fiscal 2018 tab will be at least $13 billion to meet retirement obligations for public workers, according to the analysis, which is based on actuarial reports and audited financial statements.

Barring any changes to pensions, “several California cities and counties will find themselves forced to slash other spending,” the group wrote in its report. “The less fortunate will simply be unable to pay the bills they receive from Calpers or their local retirement system.”

Quadruple is More Likely


The California Policy Center Report details 20 cities and counties reporting pension contribution-to-revenue ratios exceeding 10%. San Rafael, San Jose, and Santa Barbara County head the list at 18.29%, 13.49%, and 13.06% respectively.

The report “reflects the impact of CalPERS’ recent decision to change the rate at which it discounts future liabilities from 7.5% to 7%.


A plan assumption of 7.0% is not going to happen. Returns are more likely to be negative than to hit 7% a year for the next five years.

As in 2000 and again in 2007, investors believe the stock market is flashing an all clear signal. It isn’t.

GMO 7-Year Expected Returns


Source: GMO

*The chart represents local, real return forecasts for several asset classes and not for any GMO fund or strategy. These forecasts are forward‐looking statements based upon the reasonable beliefs of GMO and are not a guarantee of future performance. Forward‐looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and GMO assumes no duty to and does not undertake to update forward looking statements. Forward‐looking statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, and uncertainties, which change over time. Actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in forward‐looking statements. U.S. inflation is assumed to mean revert to long‐term inflation of 2.2% over 15 years.

Forecast Analysis

GMO forecasts seven years of negative real returns. Allowing for 2.2% inflation, nominal returns are expected to be negative for seven full years.

Even +3.0% returns would wreck pension plans, most of which assume six to seven percent returns.

If we see the kinds of returns I expect, even quadruple contributions will not come close to matching the actuarial needs.

by Mike “Mish” Shedlock

California Renter Apocalypse

The rise in rents and home prices is adding additional pressure to the bottom line of most California families.  Home prices have been rising steadily for a few years largely driven by low inventory, little construction thanks to NIMBYism, and foreign money flowing into certain markets.  But even areas that don’t have foreign demand are seeing prices jump all the while household incomes are stagnant.  Yet that growth has hit a wall in 2016, largely because of financial turmoil.  We’ve seen a big jump in the financial markets from 2009.  Those big investor bets on real estate are paying off as rents continue to move up.  For a place like California where net home ownership has fallen in the last decade, a growing list of new renter households is a good thing so long as you own a rental.

The problem of course is that household incomes are not moving up and more money is being siphoned off into an unproductive asset class, a house.  Let us look at the changing dynamics in California households.

More renters

Many people would like to buy but simply cannot because their wages do not justify current prices for glorious crap shacks.  In San Francisco even high paid tech workers can’t afford to pay $1.2 million for your typical Barbie house in a rundown neighborhood.  So with little inventory investors and foreign money shift the price momentum.  With the stock market moving up nonstop from 2009 there was plenty of wealth injected back into real estate.  The last few months are showing cracks in that foundation.

It is still easy to get a mortgage if you have the income to back it up.  You now see the resurrection of no money down mortgages.  In the end however the number of renter households is up in a big way in California and home ownership is down:

owner vs renters

Source:  Census

So what we see is that since 2007 we’ve added more than 680,000 renter households but have lost 161,000 owner occupied households.  At the same time the population is increasing.  When it comes to raw numbers, people are opting to rent for whatever reason.  Also, just because the population increases doesn’t mean people are adding new renter households.  You have 2.3 million grown adults living at home with mom and dad enjoying Taco Tuesdays in their old room filled with Nirvana and Dr. Dre posters.

And yes, with little construction and unable to buy, many are renting and rents have jumped up in a big way in 2015:

california rents

Source:  Apartmentlist.com

This has slowed down dramatically in 2016.  It is hard to envision this pace going on if a reversal in the economy hits (which it always does as the business cycle does its usual thing).

Home ownership rate in a steep decline

In the LA/OC area home prices are up 37 percent in the last three years:

california home prices

Of course there are no accompanying income gains.  If you look at the stock market, the unemployment rate, and real estate values you would expect the public to be happy this 2016 election year.  To the contrary, outlier momentum is massive because people realize the system is rigged and are trying to fight back.  Watch the Big Short for a trip down memory lane and you’ll realize nothing has really changed since then.  The house humping pundits think they found some new secret here.  It is timing like buying Apple or Amazon stock at the right time.  What I’ve seen is that many that bought no longer can afford their property in a matter of 3 years!  Some shop at the dollar store while the new buyers are either foreign money or dual income DINKs (which will take a big hit to their income once those kids start popping out).  $2,000 a month per kid daycare in the Bay Area is common.

If this was such a simple decision then the home ownership rate would be soaring.  Yet the home ownership rate is doing this:


In the end a $700,000 crap shack is still a crap shack.  That $1.2 million piece of junk in San Francisco is still junk.  And you better make sure you can carry that housing nut for 30 years.  For tech workers, mobility is key so renting serves more as an option on housing versus renting the place from the bank for 30 years.  Make no mistake, in most of the US buying a home makes total sense.  In California, the massive drop in the home ownership rate shows a different story.  And that story is the middle class is disappearing.

California Home Sales Make Comeback in December, After Slower November

According to the California Association of Realtors, California existing home sales rebounded in December 2015, after new loan disclosure rules delayed closings in November 2015.

U.S. home sales exceeded the 400,000-unit level in December after falling short in November. Closed escrow sales of existing, single-family detached homes in California totaled a seasonally adjusted annualized rate of 405,530 units in December, according to information collected by C.A.R.

The statewide sales figure represents what would be the total number of homes sold during 2015 if sales maintained the December pace throughout the year.  It is adjusted to account for seasonal factors that typically influence home sales.

For 2015 as a whole, a preliminary figure of 407,060 single-family homes closed escrow in California, up 6.4 percent from a revised 382,720 in 2014.

The December figure was up 9.6 percent from the revised 370,070 level in November and up 10.7 percent compared with home sales in December 2014 of a revised 366,460. The month-to-month increase in sales was the largest since January 2011, and the year-to-year increase was the largest since July 2015.

“As we speculated, sales that were delayed in November because of The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s new loan disclosure rules closed in December instead, which led to the greatest monthly sales increase in nearly five years,” said C.A.R. President Ziggy Zicarelli. “Sales increased across the board in all price segments in December, but improvement in the sub-$500,000 market was more pronounced as many homes affected by the new loan disclosures were priced under the conforming loan limit.”

The median price of an existing, single-family detached California home rose 2.6 percent in December to $489,310 from $477,060 in November. December’s median price was 8.0 percent higher than the revised $453,270 recorded in December 2014. The median sales price is the point at which half of homes sold for more and half sold for less; it is influenced by the types of homes selling as well as a general change in values. The year-to-year price gain was the largest since August 2014.

“In line with our forecast, California’s housing market experienced strong sales and price growth throughout last year, with the median price increasing 6.2 percent for the year as a whole to reach $474,420 in 2015,” said C.A.R. Vice President and Chief Economist Leslie Appleton-Young. “Looking forward, we expect the foundation for the housing market to remain strong throughout the year, with moderate increases in home sales and prices, but headwinds of tight housing supply and low affordability will remain a challenge.”

Other key points from C.A.R.’s December 2015 resale housing report include:

  • While more sales closed in December, the number of active listings continued to drop from both the previous month and year. Active listings at the statewide level dropped 11.7 percent from November and decreased 7.9 percent from December 2014. At the regional level, total active listings continued to decline from the previous year in Southern California, Central Valley, and the San Francisco Bay Area, dropping 9.6 percent, 7.6 percent, and 5.2 percent, respectively.
  • The sharp increase in sales in December and fewer listings combined to tighten the available supply of homes on the market. C.A.R.’s Unsold Inventory Index fell to 2.8 months in December from 4.2 months in November. The index stood at 3.2 months in December 2014. The index indicates the number of months needed to sell the supply of homes on the market at the current sales rate. A six- to seven-month supply is considered typical in a normal market.
  • The median number of days it took to sell a single-family home increased in December to 39.5 days, compared with 37.5 days in November and 44.1 days in December 2014.
  • According to C.A.R.’s newest housing market indicator, which measures the sales-to-list price ratio*, properties are generally selling below the list price, except in the San Francisco Bay Area, where a lack of homes for sale is pushing sales prices higher than original asking prices.  The statewide measure suggests that homes sold at a median of 97.9 percent of the list price in December, up from 97.2 percent at the same time last year. The Bay Area is the only region where homes are selling above original list prices due to constrained supply with a ratio of 100.7 percent in December, up from 100 percent a year ago.
  • The average price per square foot** for an existing, single-family home was $230 in December 2015, up from $222 in December 2014. 
  • San Francisco continued to have the highest price per square foot in December at $749/sq. ft., followed by San Mateo ($715/sq. ft.), and Santa Clara ($568/sq. ft.).  The three counties with the lowest price per square foot in December were Siskiyou ($107/sq. ft.), Tulare ($123/sq. ft.), and Merced ($124/sq. ft.).
  • Mortgage rates inched up in December, with the 30-year, fixed-mortgage interest rate averaging 3.96 percent, up from 3.94 percent in November and up from 3.86 percent in December 2014, according to Freddie Mac.  Adjustable-mortgage interest rates also edged up, averaging 2.66 percent in December, up from 2.63 percent in November and up from 2.40 percent in December 2014.