Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 04-06-2010 BOE.pdfCITY OF PLYMOUTH BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AGENDA APRIL b, 2010, 7:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. Call to Order. 2. City Assessor's Report. 3. Public Comments. 4. Adjourn. Board of Equalization April 6, 2010 City of Plymouth 2010 Annual Assessment Report 19 City of Plymouth Date: April 6, 2010 To: Plymouth Local Board of Appeal and Equalization From: Janene Hebert, City Assessor Through: Cal Portner, Administrative Services Director Subject: 2010 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization, April b, 2010, 7:00pm Attached for your review is a report on the 2010 Assessment prepared by the assessing staff. The report introduces you to value adjustments, statistical measurements of our work, and general information which the assessing staff utilizes to determine values for the annual assessment. This will hopefully make your job, as a member of the Board of Appeal and Equalization, easier to understand. Market values are based on market activity, which fluctuates with general economic conditions such as interest rates, inflation, supply and demand, and changes in tax laws. By Minnesota State law, as property values change in the marketplace, the changes must be reflected in the assessor's estimated market values. The system involves the comparison of properties with actual market sales from the same neighborhoods. All sales information collected by the assessor's office is closely analyzed, and market values are adjusted by comparing properties that sold with properties that have not sold. The comparison provides the basis for the assessor's estimated market value. The State Department of Revenue uses ratio studies to measure our assessment level. They mandate the sales period which we use to set our values. The sales period for the January 2, 2010, assessment was October 1, 2005, through September 30, 2009. During this period, we saw the same continuation of the downward swing, in residential values as we did for the 2009 assessment. The result was a 5.790 decline in value of single family properties for the 2010 assessment. By law, the assessor must set values based upon historical sales, not by predicting the future. ZD The most common concern voiced is, -4ve cannot sell our home today for the value you have it assessed." Unfortunately, the October 2009 to April 2010 sales are not valid for this report and will be considered for the 2011 assessed valuation. Property owners seem to understand the time frame but are concerned that the assessed value is higher than the purchase price. Sales of foreclosed properties are not considered an open market transaction by the Minnesota Department of Revenue and were not considered in setting the 2010 values. This is outlined in the joint MAAO and Department of Revenue Advisory on Foreclosures and is available to the public to explain the valuation process. The purpose of the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization is to hear property owner testimony concerning the Assessor's 2010 estimated market value or property classification based on documentation provided. This may be done in three ways: 1. In person 2. In writing 3. By property owner's representative. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Board of Appeal & EqualiLation will recess. It will reconvene at 7:00 p.m. on April 20, 2010. Decisions on all appeals will be made at that time based on staff reports and information submitted by the property owner. This year's certification form from the Department of Revenue asks the following question: Did the LBAE make changes to parcels owned by a member of the board, the spouse, parent, son or daughter of a board member, or property in which a board member has a financial or other interest in the property? If yes, please list the parcel numbers of the properties that were changed on the back of this form. Board members have a right to contest their value the same as any other citizen. However, I suggest the Board recommend "no change" and have the Hennepin County decide the value or classification to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. I invite you to read the information and feel free to call me at 763-509-5332 with your questions or comments. 4cerely, x anenteHeber City Assessor City of Plymouth TABLE OF CONTENTS Local Board of ReVe`v & Equalization Authority Local Board of Review & Equalization Ovendew Plymouth Assessing, Staff 2010 Assessment Summary 2010 Assessment Introduction 2010 Assessment Statistics 2010 Ratio Study Appeal Process 5 r 10 11 13 Maps 16 Local Board of Review & Equalization Authority Minnesota Statutes, Section 274.01, state that the council of each city shall be or shall appoint a Board of Appeal & Equalisation. The Plymouth City Charter requires the city council to act as the Local Board of Appeal & Equalization. The 2004 legislation enacted a law that requires members of the Local Boards to attend a training session that outlines their duties and responsibilities. Council members Willis and Black have attended the training session. Assessments of property are made to provide the means for the measuring of the relative share of each tax -pay er in meeting the costs of local government. It is the duty of the assessor to assess all real and personal property except that which is exempt or taxable under some special method of taxation. If the burden of local government is to be fairly and justly shared among, the owners of all property of value, it is necessary that all taxable property be listed on the tax rolls and that all assessments be made accordingly. The authority of the local board extends over the individual assessments of real and personal property. The board does not have the power to increase or decrease by a percentage all of the assessments in the district of a given class of property. The County Board of Equalization can make changes in the aggregate assessments by class. Although the local board has the authority to increase or reduce individual assessments, the total of such adjustments must not reduce the aggregate assessment made by the Assessor by more than one percent. If the total of such assessments does lower the aggregate assessment made by the assessor by more than one percent, none of the adjustments will be allot --ed. This limitation does not apply, however, to the correction of a clerical error or to the removal of a duplicate assessment. Local Board of ReNdew & Equalization Overview Once again the struggling real estate market has been the talk of the last year. Plymouth continued to experience a dotivnward swing in the residential market but has remained somewhat sheltered from the foreclosure market. The Minnesota Area Association of Realtors reported that Plymouth has a louver than average share of lender -mediated properties; 16.4 percent compared to the total Twin Cities inventory at 25.29/b. October of 2009 showed a decline in lender -mediated sales from the same time period in 2008, but increased over the same time period in 2007. The majority of residential properties in Plymouth saw a decrease to their 2010 estimated market values. Since we began tracking foreclosures in 2008 appro.- =ately 566/0 of the foreclosures in Plymouth have resold. This is another indication that we are weathering the downward trends in the market quite well. The average percentage changes in valuation are as follows: Property Type Value Percent Value Percent Value Percent Change Change Change from from from 2007 to 2008 2008 to 2009 2009 to 2010 Residential 2.81-1/o 4.8% 5.7°lo Residential 2.0% 3.9`;r0 8.10/0 Lakeshore Condominiums 5.79/o 6.00/b 9.71)/o Townhomes 4.8% 6. ;,o 6. 10,16 Apartments 1.50/0 6.4c,b 8.5 ,b Commercial/ 1.31-','o 5.1010 4.30%6 Industrial In reviewing the individual assessments, the board may find instances of under valuation. Before the board can raise the market value of property, it must notify the owner. The law does not prescribe any particular form of notice except that the person whose property is to be increased in assessment must be notified of the intent of the board to make the increase. The Local Board of Appeal 6z Equalization assures the property owner an opportunity to contest the valuation that was placed on the property or to contest or protest any other matter relating to the taxability of the property except the tax. The board is required to review the matter and make any corrections that it deems just. Exceptions to the above market value changes include new construction, quintile areas, reappraisals, and/or other market adjustments. The stages of development for Northwest Plymouth laid out in the comprehensive plan have changed the method for valuing rural property. There are now 5 different development stages. Development has slowed due to the economy. Stage A, A.1 and B are being valued at $160,000 an acre with adjustments being factored in for distance from utilities, terrain, usability etc. Stage C is at $120,000 an acre with Stage D at $110,000 an acre. On March 8, 2010, 25,496 value notices were mailed to Plymouth property owners. The 2010 assessment represents many hours of staff research and time. We feel confident the 2010 assessment is fair and well equalizzed throughout the City of Plymouth. Respectfully submitted, Assessing Department Staff n a a p a " n ESTI'_vfATED &L—kRKET VALUE - The value which the Assessor has estimated the property to be worth. EQUALIZATION - The adjustment of assessed valuation o of real property in a particular area to establish a more o equitable diNision of tax burden within an area. 11 A o APPRAISER - One who estimates value, specifically, one Q vho possesses the necessary qualification, ability and 13 0 experience to execute or direct the appraisal of real property. z a 2 n C P c !_1 C 3 Plymouth Assessing Department Michael Vanderlinden WAS Appraiser Jan Olsson SAMA RES Appraiser Supervisor Jake Pidde CMA Commercial Appraiser Peggy 5chulman Assessment Technician 2010 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY The 2010 assessment affects all property owners in the City of Plymouth. As required by state lave, the city assessor is required to reassess all property each year. State statute requires All real property subject to taxation shall be listed and assessed every year with reference to its value on January 2, preceding the assessment. This has been done and the owners of property in Plymouth were notified of any change. Minnesota state statute 273.11 reads: All property shall be valued at its market value. It fitrther states that "in estimating and determining such value, the Assessor shall not adopt a lower or different standard of value because the same is to serve as a basis for taxation, nor shall he adopt as a criterion of value that price for which such property would sell, or in the aggregate with all the property in the town or district but he shall value each article or description of property by itself, and at such surn or price as he believes that same to be fairly worth in money. The statute says all property should be valued at market value. This means that no factors other than market (such as economics, personalities or politics) shall affect the assessor's value and the subsequent action by the Board of Appeal & Equalizzation. Market value has been defined many different ways. Simply stated, it is the highest price estimated in terms of cash which a property will bring if exposed for sale on the open market by a seller who is willing, but not obligated to sell, allowing a reasonable time to find a purchaser who is willing but not obligated to buy, both with knowledge of all the uses to which it is adapted and for which it is capable of being used. The real estate tax is an ad valorem tax, a tax based on the value of property, not on the ability of the property owner to pay. The 2010 assessment (includes new construction, quartile adjustments, and/or market adjustments) reflects a 5.3% overall valuation decrease from the 2009 assessment. The amount of netts- construction between January 2009 and January 2010 was $55,351,800. The market change, exclusive of new construction was —5.8/0. 2009 TOTAL CITY VALUE $9,548,268,200 2010 TOTAL CITY VALUE $9,049,950,700 PRELIMINARY) 498,317,500) PERCENTAGE CHANGE -5.3% VALUE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION $55,351,800 PERCENTAGE NaV CONSTRUCTION 0.6% VALUE CHANGE TO EXISTING PROPERTY -5.8 ,lo 5 City of Plymouth Percentages Value 10,000,000,000 6,750,000,000 7,500,000,000 e 6,250,000,000 5,000,000,000 3,750,000,000 2,500,000,000 Total Market Value 2010 Assessment introduction State laver provides that the assessment shall be an annual assessment with all property in the taxing jurisdiction re -valued to its market value every January 2. For this assessment 6,024 properties were reviewed (23.6%) fulfilling the state mandated review of 20% of all existing properties within the City of Plymouth. This is commonly referred to as the "Quintile." In the areas of re -inspection, new items that previously were not on our records were added, or where applicable, deleted. Of all homes reviewed, 60% were internally inspected. A preliminary sales study was analyzed prior to placing a final value on each property inspected. Plymouth's preliminary residential median ratio entering, the 2010 assessment was 98.O9/o. Hennepin County determines this ratio. They compare the January 2, 2009, estimated market values to sales occurring from October 1, 2008, through September 30, 2009. The average residential decrease for the January 2, 2010, assessment was -5.7%. This was determined by comparing the January 2, 2010, estimated market values to the same sales, thus establishing the 2010 estimated market values at a median sales ratio of .950 and a mean ratio of .953 with a 5.1 coefficient of dispersion. In accordance with the results of this sales study, certain areas of the city, certain styles, and certain sizes of houses were adjusted in value, either lower or higher than the prior year value, to more properly reflect actual market values. The 2009 average sale price of existing residential housing stock (off the lake) was $359,000; this price does not include townhouses or condos. This is extracted from the Hennepin County Ratio Study of all arms -length transactions involving single family homes. Lakeshoreproperty was adjusted according to the sale activity on each lake. Average lakeshore property received a decrease of approximately 8.191b. The average sale price of existing lakeshore property m 2009 was $427,700. Various townhome and condominium complexes were adjusted according to market activity as well as studied to determine if the number of bedrooms per unit affected the sale prices. Tov,-nhomes and condominiums also decreased in market value. The average sale price of condominiums was $157,158, an average decrease of -97%. The average town home sale price was $228,016, down -6.1% from 2009. As the economy worsened, unemployment increased and the credit crunch continued to affect the Plymouth commercial and industrial markets. The overall commercial market is wveak but remains stronger than the industrial market. City-wyide, the commercial and industrial assessment was reduced 4.3oro for the 2010 assessment. The apartment market was not only impacted by the job losses, but the incentives for first time home buyers. As a result the apartment market wvas decreased 8.5ob. 7 The value placed on properties is accomplished only after a thorough market place study is conducted. Costs of replacement are checked with local builders, as well as cost manuals which are created by experts in the field of building and appraising. Sales of property are constantly analyzed to see what is happening in the marketplace. The assessors/appraisers do not create value; they only measure its movement. Equitably assessing property values is part science, part judgment, part communication skills, and largely a mystery to many property owners. The task becomes more difficult because property construction, financing and ownership are more complex today than ever before. 13 COEFFICIENT OF DISPERSION - (Assessment Accu- racy) In statistics, the measure of absolute dispersion to o an appropriate average. A measure of relative dispersion. Sometimes referred to as an `index of assessment ine- quality". Under 10% is in the excellent range. CAPITALIZATION - The process of converting into pre- sent value (or obtaining the present worth of) a series of ° anticipated future periodic installments of net income. In real estate appraising, it usually takes the form of dis- countinm o DEPRECIATION - A loss of utility and hence value from 00 any cause. An effect caused by deterioration and/or ob- 13 solescence. There are several types of depreciation. B Training cannot tell us how to find the `perfect" value of a property, but training can consistently produce the same estimate of value for identical property by different assessors. That, after all, is a working definition of equalization. The following pages contain helpful information that will make your job as a member of the Board of Appeal & Equalization more productive. I. DISTRIBUTION OF 2010 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE BY PROPERTY TYPE Apartments 6% CommerciaUIndus ential 74% 2010 EMV Residential $ 7,072,298,900 Commercial/ Industrial $ 1,945,321,700 Apartments $ 5821621,600 Total $ 9,049,950,700 we 2010 ASSESSMENT STATISTIC'S Total City Parcel Count (01-02-09) 25,454 Total City Parcel Count (01-02-10) 25,496 Parcel Count Per Appraiser 2010 Assessment 4,777 Assessor's Industry• Standard per Appraiser 4,249 2009 Total Estimated Market Value $ 9,545,268,200 2010 Total Estimated `vlarket Value (Preliminary) S 9,049,950,700 2008 to 2009 Total City Valuation Growth (5.00,/0) 2009 to 2010 Total. City Valuation Growth (5.30/,) 2008 Total Building Permits 6,533 2009 Total Building Permits 6,315 2007 Plymouth's Average Home Sale Price $ 365,100 2008 Plymouth's Average Home Sale Price $366,800 200SPlymouth's Median Home Sale Price $335,000 2009 Ply mouth's Average Hume Sale Price 5359,000 2009 Plyrnouth's Median Home Sale Price 5329,000 Does not include townhouses or condos) 2009 "Ni ledian" Sales Ratio (Assessment Level) 94.51-,10 2010 "Median" Sales Ratio (Assessment Level) 95.00'0 2009 Coefficient of Dispersion (Assessment Accuracy) 4.811/b 2010 Coefficient of Dispersion (Assessment Accuracy) 5.1% 200S Approximate dumber of Sales (including new construction) 959 2009 Approximate Number of Sales (including new construction) 1,067 10 2010 RATIO STUDY The equalization of values is done through the process of sales studies. Sale studies compare the assessor's value with that same property's actual sale price. The comparison provides ratio indicators that are recognized by the county and the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue. The ratio indicators must reach acceptable levels or they will trigger corrective action for general across-the-board adjustments by the county assessor or the commissioner of revenue. The general corrections are essentially a "shotgun blast" type correction that affects the adequate and inadequate values alike, and although they correct equalization across. jurisdiction lines, they do just the opposite within a jurisdiction by increasing inequity. The Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue and the Hennepin County Assessor have mandated that any jurisdiction falling below a 90.0% plateau will be forced into corrective action. Corrective action may cause everyone in the jurisdiction to suffer. Our coefficient of dispersion in this year's study is 5.1%, anything under 10 is considered excellent. This is comparable to other jurisdictions of our size in Hennepin County. This is a direct result of our computerization of the appraisal process and demonstrates our ability to administer fair and equalized valuations at both ends of the value spectrum. Our price -related differential is currently at 100.579. This shows our ability to treat higher priced homes as equally as the lower priced homes. 100 is consideredep rfect. The figures below are based on the sale of existing homes that meet the state criteria for arm's length transactions for the 2010 assessment. Hennepin County Sales Statistics STYLE OF SALES AVG. SALE PRICE MEDIAN RATIO Ramblers 50 309,943 953 Splits 71 5 291,163 980 Two Stories 124 385,054 945 Rambler -Cluster Homes 13 35 ,997 950 Splits -Cluster Homes 6 265,278 967 Two Stories -Cluster Homes 4 290,000 979 Condominiums 96 157,158 948 Townhomes 97 228,016 950 TOTAL 461 11 PLYMOUTH 2010 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUE DISTRIBUTION VALUE PLRCLNT Of HOMES Under $100,000 2.1% 475 100,001 to $200,000 21.8% 4,889 200,001 to $300,000 36.9% 8,272 300,001 to $400,000 222% 4,964 400,001 to $500,000 9.8% 2,186 500,001 to $700,000 5.8°x0 1,298 Over $700,001 1.4% 317 Total 100% 22,401 UNDER 5100.001 5200,001 5300,001 S400,001 $500,001 Over 100,000 TO To TO TO TO 700,001 5200,000 1300,000 W0,000 5500,000 $700,000 15,792 VALUE 68 Living Unit Breakdown Condominium TYPE OF DWELLING 2009 ASMT 2010 ASMI OF UNITS OF UNITS Apartments 7,190 7,190 Single Family Homes 15,747 15,792 Duplex 68 66 Condominium 2,862 2,864 Townhomes 3,513 3,533 Permalease 29 28 Mobile Homes 59 59 Farm Houses 10 10 Seasonal Recreation 6 6 Co -Op Units 210 210 TOTAL LIVING UNITS 29,694 29,758 A increase of 64 living units over the 2009 assessment. Total number of homesteads 111110 21,022, 12 APPEAL. PROCESS VALUATION NOTICE DISCUSS VALUE WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL & EQUALIZATION DENS" APPEAL CHANGI VALUE HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD OF APPEAL iso; EQUALIZATION STATE TAX CURT ADMINISTRATIVEE REVIEW f APPROVE APPEAL I DENS' APPEAL I City of Plymouth Adding Quality to Life Frequently asked Questions Why are my property taxes gong up when the value ofmy home is staying the same or declining? I thought there was a "IevyliFnit" that froze the property tax rate on myhomel Why did the taxahle value ofmy home increase even though the market value stayed the same? These are just a few of the questions that we've received during this time of stalling or falling home prices, Property taxes in Minnesota are a complicated and often confusing topic for residents. We hope the following information answers some of your questions. Assessor's Values Lag Behind The Market. Property taxes payable in 2010 are based upon the property's estimated market value as of January 2, 2009. This value is based upon the Assessor's analysis of market trends during 2006. Thus, when you pay your 2010 tax bill, your property's valuation is already two years old. But That's Not Fair Remember, during a rising real estate market, property owners benefited by the assessor's valuation that lagged behind the true value. In a stable or declining market, the reverse is true. In either event, all properties are rising or falling with the market and, in general terms, the tax burden of an individual property is not affected by the lag in values - either in an up market or a down market. When Values Rise, The City Collects More Taxes. So, Isn't There An Incentive For The City To Increase My Property Value? Property taxes are fundamentally different than income taxes or sales taxes. In those cases, the tax rate is fixed and the taxes collected are determined by multiplying the rate by income or the value of goods purchased. With property taxes, the property tax rate is determined each year after the city, the county and the school district make their budget decisions. Property valuations are then used to allocate the tax burden in an equitable manner across all properties. A rising real estate market does not generate more tax revenue nor does a flat or declining market result in less tax revenue for the city. Property valuation determines how the tax levy will be spread and your share of your community's property tax bill. If your value increased more than the average value increase of other properties in the city, you will assume a greater burden of the tax bill - and vice versa.. How Does The Value Of Non-residential Property Figure In? Plymouth has a stable commercial/industrial tax base that benefits residential taxpayers. However, for many years, the value of residential properties in the city increased at a faster pace than non-residential properties and the tax burden fell more heavily on residential taxpayers. The reverse is now occurring and commercial/industrial properties have a greater share of the burden compared with last year. 14 Why Wasn't The School District's November Referendum Included in My Truth-In- Ta_xation Notice? The Truth -in -Taxation process is tightly regulated by the state. According to law, Truth -in - Taxation notices must be mailed by the county before the November referendums, so the ap- proved school district levy was not included in parcel -specific notices. This is the case in all communities that had a November referendum}.. Plymouth Assessing Department 763-509-5360 15 NAPS ARTICLES 1L The 100+ Market Updates for tog Twin Cities Communities A free research tool from the Minneapolis Area Association of REALTORS& Brought to you by the unique data -sharing traditions of the REALTORS community Plymouth MINNEAPOLIS AREA Association of REALTORS' December Year to Date Hennepin County, MN 2008 2009 Change 2008 2009 Change New Listings 84 58 31.0% 1,766 1,610 8.8% Closed Sales 41 61 48,8% 792 838 5.8% Median Sales Price 287,000 217,000 24.4% 275,000 253,000 8.0% Average Sales Price 306,369 264,960 13.5% 318,617 291,261 8.6% Percent of Original List Price Received at Sale' 91.9% 91.8% 0.2% 93.4% 92.1% 1.4% Average Days on Market Until Sale- 160 169 5.9% 129 133 3.8% Single -Family Detached Inventory 251 2.16 13.9% Townhouse -Condo Inventory 224 189 15.6% 1 Does not account for list prices from any previous listing contracts "City market time figures are based on Cumulative Oays on Market, which does account for previous listing contracts Activity—Most Recent Month Activity—Year to Date 64 2008 1,766 2008 62009 1,610 2009 New Listings Median Sales Price 267,000 December 2008 $275,000 $ 293,000 U2009 Year to Date New Listings 792 838 Closed Sales Percent of Original List Price Received 91.9% 01.8% E2008 93'4% 200 December 92.1% Year to Date Average Flays on Market Until Sale Inventory of Homes for Sale 160 169 2008 251 2008 B2009 129 133 216 22009 224 189 December Year to Date Single -Family Detached Townhouse -Condo Some of the figures referenced in this report are for only one month worth of activity. As such, they can sometimes look extreme due to the small sample size involved. For broader historical market information, please feel free to contact us. m 2009 Minneagolis Area Association of REALTORSO, Inc. I ponsorad by Royal Credit Union—" www.rcu.org FORECLOSURES AND SHORT SALES 4? N T H E TW I N CITIES HOUSING MARKET MINNEAPOLIS AREA A-ciiti.n f REALTORS Area 374: Lender -Mediated Traditional Plymouth 1-2010* 1- 1-2009* 1-2010* 1-2009" Median Sales Price 220,000 178,000 19.1% 290,000 272,500 6.0% Median Price Per Square Foot 110 103 6.4% 134 127 5.3% Percent of Original List Price Received at Sale 90.0% 892% 0.8% 93.8%a 92.9% 1.0% Days on Market Until Sale 147 143 2.4% 130 132 0.9% Median Sales Price 1-2008 thru 12-2008 Median Price Per Square Foot 1-2009 thru 12-2009 290,000 272,500 $ 110 s1a3 a 1-2008 thru 12-2008 1-2009 thru 12-2009 134 5127 Lender -Mediated Traditional Lender -Mediated Percent of Original List Price Received 1-2008 thru 12-2008 Days on Market Until Sale 1-2009 thru 12-2009 147 93.8% 92.9% 90.0%a 89.2% Lender -Mediated Traditional Lender -Mediated Traditional a 1-2008 thru 12-2008 1-2009 thru 12-2009 1 130 32 Traditional 2009 Minneapolis Area Association of REALTORSO, Inc. I Sponsored by Royal Credit Union _" "N.rcu.org Page 2 of 2 map 2009 MEDIAN HOME PRICES includes single family detacW homed sorrdominiums, townhomes and twin homes LEGEND 212,000 and above 169,900 -$211,999 142,001-$169,899 142,000 and bellow RMLS Boundry 368 MLS District 7( Airport 782 784 ILAMER)" Sra bm ANau ®.faa [}+ow`at' 7 sna L Trp Trp Twp La w 711 - f. TeP TWp - - - , T,p ST FRANCIS aETHEL STAG/ CENTER IIHAFER CITY LJNOSTRCY BECKER EAST SETHEI. Lri - 13muro meFra BIG LAM 756 758 OAA 7'13 1— CITTWP 754 , Rowvomuz EL.LO 7110 709 OSCEOLA 341 fift OTSEGO 760 = 2. FOREST Famigrn w ake Tp T., Twp T.P Tap FawFl ALBERMLLE IWP Z34;0 ST 7aCHA 767 BlARFE TT -P "BUF366 COON 764 CEI-ILE 705 RAPfGSCdlAlpl.M PiwS R1L0 LAKES HUGCT SPW - PiMES R.&fere BRO MLYN LAR L117rAGTON ".772 SOyE0.SET T" PARR rilxe Bma - j + SHCR-E."MAI T»p --'. Ir Ra aORD 364 ry NCRTHOA S DELL S $05 WAVERLY 768 ARDto" 706 708' T"p MONTROSE 3638 xON St 786 765 - i 61 770 r. - D 62 301 V rd—J F -65n ALF: Sr.702 =- d TeP Tiy 306 - ROSE E 712 a.ar k.oac« Hums, 306 _` FALCHEIGHTfH_ ErGHTS srA1LELLrOOa 725 ernrw rwo 744 74 714 Yur araLrN - - 7% ; _ 746 NT LANDFALL HUDSON W.WT..y - 3U8 i:- Tia 728 . ST .,. - 304. 600 T uAYER - - -- --' ;--. aAmrT 0 - T -P NEINGERVANY $ 7( Np WAROA T. 384 379 :Armor mw 394 CHASAA BLOOtANGTCr1 _ EAG&4 60$ ,,72t T397610Bm GREE ORD mb Chaska -" HOG Tw NDRr.'eco T,p 640 c YOIRGCLOG .-.r :ao 617 pTiESCOTT A CLINu AKGpEE hiNSYB I LE Baffia CAFw 614 6164 ^ S 612 p T.p iauar3e APPLE ROSEAOVw Oak Gmra T VALLEY HPs18LPRG - yy HYL a Sn rrat=c^a S. I. -. Y - Twp JO.i+J.a.Y 646y624 370 FMwNGTG Twp Tp WLU N euELAINENNA,r F' ,r p ENR &IR:SVilE YMeri BammF<oin! Tep J 650 T p _ L T.P "gin F T.p R "x`"628PRAGUE648660HENCERSr-4 630 CLY CAlir1C'AI Ty— T -P a Gra+'rr a W—i.ra S— Twp FALLS TWP H0"4aaan T^P_ _O%rry— HF.MEL9c?2G 1 . rwp Twp Tap ap C— F." wp # Trp T -1, s c 632 L`S"EUR' 658 NvhfamTap 10 Min polis Area Association or REALTORS= - LEGEND 5115 and above 598 — $114 87—$97 O 86 and below RMLS Boundary 368 MLS District 7( Airport map 2009 HOM E PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT closing sales puce relative to rata! finished square footage 782 784 1 ctia/AFR&La}I S T CT1 nL*l Snaln Q y `" T , r' f _ _ 711 T seem. 780 rP 5S FRANCS aETHEL ST CY G SHAPER T-0 UNDSTRON BECKER EAST 9ETHEL i!1'Rald N cm P TwP'.. MG 756 758 aAK 713 3dvaY Creak 754 EL76 RP/ER 1 WCC£ _7 F. WOWNC gmapa lake Twp MONTICF-Lo.--77.Q' 709 iY OSGE9La 760 ff RANSE`r 762 107 Trp F 341 , aTSEao `LAKS Trp Wye take Taq Tr.p AFQ)G4'$R HpJA LAKE LakeYv. ALuF-4TVq-,- UP STMcHAEl H- 767 TwP 9 -NE r367DTYTCi T BUFFALO340 rip R6CER5 366 COONR- Pfc764 ANT R,E 705 dam ZOVER Q+Ak.PLal CTR LA^73 HLr.0 FSpRlric PMSLa+iEs MLYN a LENPKTTGN 1772 SCKIERSET Rotlta+A C Trp V" 9a 771. xPHflcCRn 364 768 z DaKSTrp los 708 - T,p 805 wAVEaLarcHrRosE ° 368 363 s;:w_a NL.YN t T" 61 a 776 786 62- amuawmF. n _ sY 12.xnr. T -P T" o 6 ,G`T 712 725 f HVCsae 395 w pLexCrc r,...DaLE T» ELMO714 KAT€ctTEW4_307., NTP. LANOFAL _ Huoscw 7 -(X p - wavcwr - 308' rip 726t — 60a 9MT, Q Y,OCCELRY Trp k k41YEFi W, S vaERLwHY Yramia r" 378 cashe- Twp _ - .-- 380 379 A, 722WACaHLi CrxSKa SLOCI,RplGTGV Eacue b'{i8 aaRA R1 GarrAae 394 397 610 ROf HEIGHTS wp Np N.aaD T- 640 WRIC CC7LOGNc Caf- . T- _ ro Rw T Trp SHAiGPE 644 814 616 617$C6TT . Amraa ir+ ._:. ,E, 612 Ate,-_. sEx,wgT _ . T Si4v5 w4 L1KE ta_Y ikkk4BUftG - _ r . 642 CCATES 618 r zk 6n L _Twp Sv: Tue <G-A:. i ;a.at A., Vi6 i •E'Wa .r..4:__:CY ,y9. Rnema P LAd InLl 1 624 T.V 646 370 Fa a `TP PAR1eHN Tom' Th' ---"" - ---- ---`- - - y SELL= NtrHA CCN 1&'N lWESVILE Wa PLA E L -km i THlER T.P Trp Cc+ peeawa TZe c. NEW E Tp aaxes V28Jsi'.'1ard S:%deY T- Wka Trp MRKU wp Trp 650 E' --NO Twp CN}taT 1JJ L.= 648630 - N 660 RA. Ll" aaT-0 CFAJAS W i Lanes a wrae m e %AA jsd Socia UP Pap Tie N+Xnur Twe Twp Twp 141vnsm wv tiienyrae HEi7_SERG Trp C— Eaii 658 - T- - ', 632 9Tw T-9TVT- SUEtRi ':: iCaL= rMaSrJ www.mplsrealloccom 11 1211-3 h.1. 1 OfHI i I 3 l-------$------------------ - ------ G oax AY£ O p 00 6 O 0 O O ° O 5,,° a ° oaf o © o 0 ins O Wk 9w 19DIAYE O O RGf^'^ TIxE ROCEYmMTrss g$s;38y91 5 Ifl 1= Evil WAHgR]13 TO Current Foreclosure Properties As of January 2010 IrRbCityf Plymouth, Minnesota 0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2 Miles THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCE5 THAT HAS NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. RNORMAT7oN &Kx" " FIELD VERIFIED AND CDMPARFD WrTH ORINGIAL SOURCE DDCLWIENTS. Legend Q Single Family Multiple Family Commercial R Industrial 0 Vacant City Limits Lakes N:tiPLY_GISIPROJECTS,ASSESSING1ForeclosuresSForeclosure Properties..mxd stx ATne AAE SEH Ar£ nIAAE p,THMI[ sslxlsE mn+ME aT 121 HIM; 336H G11HIIIHag sI K IP1111im111111131p1 4!N98111!]11Rull 1111121!m i $I ag e la—W AAE asrHAA,< onI AIE niH AAE TiIH AAE un1AVE 2MHME t 51HAAE IRS5I AAE sMAVE f RflC£WIrI AAE VIM I9 s ., p83$$ bi as;[ h IMM 2 j3z y VW - Sold Foreclosure Properties As of January 2010 Legend Single Family City of Plymouth, Minnesota 9 MultlpEe Family 0 0.25 OS 1 1.5 2 Vacant MiEes THIS REPRrSe" 5 A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA City Limns FROM Cin; COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS NOT REEK FIELD VERIFIED. WFORMATKIH SHOULD RE FIELD VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS. Lakes N.PLY GIS'IPROJECTSIASSESSING%Foreclosures\Foreclosure Properlies.mxd map 2009 SHARE OF SALES THAT ARE LENDER -MEDIATED includes sing% family detached homes, condominiums, townhames and twin homes; percentages are reflective ofeach individual MLS district LEGEND 57.1 % and above 43.4°l-57.G°J 32.1% - 43.3% - 32.0% and below RMS OOurodary 368 NILS Disbiet Pf Airport µLnyKpC Trp WYOMING 710 709 OSaEOLA FORE. i--T;, 762 Fay ANoc ER Fuw Trp Nauan +367 o rG•e SLAiNE fibre Tw'p RDC-EiS- 764 1,.705 s,,.a. e 3 LLE T 4fNER C:RCLE1 LDaP LAKES NVGG LO'GTGN &1 727 SOMERSET MRCORL m GSSEO 3653may i +fDREveEW rp EE La 36$ MAP GROVE 768 EN 706 708 GRANT s Ey s " 8© 5 LCtiETTG... a w» r 7 'L 765TWP p 374SidLWATER 3361 LLE CUfA caGEF ND&+ pLYMOLTti j NE,LM =..: 703 R oa,>, E 308 ROSEVtLLE 712'' DON wYCCWT 725 kLRIN Fk an 381LLEf71CJNE LANE yx4, 373 WAPLFNODO` 1 744 w ELaap . wetl Twp WATERTO Na ORCNO WAYZATR L 740 tANDFALL T"4 NUDSON wa reNNETFLSTA 391 NN 7 7 729300 4f No. me y.P TwP WauNo ND 38,, 309 752 726 " ai ACAeS SICREWOOD Ln EaPu 304 aoa WOCOSUR AFTON WAVER 3S5 T.sa 7- Y LEW GERM 378 a °a721398paR,.eRssEN PAUL G,ea.n 396 392 380 379 LAS UL722 Tp wAGGNJA EDEN PS AKA PRAHUE SLGGWa N PAGAN basGn-i COTTAGE G 394 397D. GRA y T,,, NCRWUOD T 40AXAX4 CUNG COLOGNE oahgen T. S. S P SUftN SVILLE 617 cAR ER SAVAGE 612 614 616 PREscan T -P TWP PRXM APPLE ROSE IDUNT WwgaF 1 OaCraveTa, p LAKE VALLEY TPMGS Iw1R0DRG d RW 642 A" mATES 61$ Caxe Twp X% San Frame Ta, C1.s 626 VSUKU NL "r R l.I1tEWR.LE Rawerra VemimT. r, 370 TMPN_ M. 1ka TNEW M1ESV1LLE Wth Lkkaa T. P T., T1WT.*wT D WA."i1(ET ELKO E;r9ia Trp CadeRc<. T C2p 1°nay 1 [ 7de PRAGUE 64$ Tap s3o-J660 PSGN RanEpeh CANNON LaneataegµTi -u: d RA raa WuerYei+ Sv", Tvq FALLS Yaa F Dc ryr-rs ME-GELSE3G T,.p T'.p T.q Twp Ca+esmFab Tw, u658 Tw: 632 Sv SUEUR LC- 450ALE 16 Minneapelip Pres Assvciativr. vF REAL; LEGEND 12.3% and above C3 21.1% to -12.64h 28.6% to -21.2% 28.7% and below RMLS Boundary 368 MLS District I f Airport map HOME PRICE CHANCES SINCE 2©O3 irdudes sir.gfe family detached homed condominiums, townhomes and twin homes 782 784 I 5 T"` P Bader 780 L 711 STf RA1JC65 STACY CENTER SHAPER CrrY T -P L@i7 STROM BECKER 7 r C7 EAST BETHEL ` Rw TMia- O F- 758 Tramsda EIGwcE r Oar. 75 , J AK J 754 wP I J a Go 13 T J- NYCMIN+/G( cm.** vM Sd C— ELX RIVER Tap f 1a 7'1/.7 TI+P Twp CBCEOLL 4.CNTCE iG % n 1 V •:?- f:_ •` :CREST `$ Fa T SPPs341GTSEGG762707RAMSEY1E Md T Lake T ALBERTVIL.E Y P - 0.113b ry.J,J j ( + - MARINE GN Trp f SF fAC>1A_ ss" all +767 SLAM A ST CRCIX 34a 76.a/ r 5 p7^I+zia BI FA:ii _ ., 366' COON [ V:! C. -ER, -705 r'Aq Twp. S - RAvlesP HUG UNO LAKES GcJuwcu+ BROOKLYNr ' LzJm7GTGw; 727 SOMERSET PARKR TJc- P CORCORAN -364 - _ "p771 rp P ROOc CJJD cT i / a ,. 1n Q _- WOOO Scarab 3tx'aTsel 8 05 WAJEY'.! IeGREE4FIELD 3 8 3fi3 R 13 p1LfI , 4 ! VC7 hrP MONTROSE St LORErrO 61 1 770 ? -_ IAA rwa - ST1LLWAT£R TwP 82 c W.0d 'd Frafyil INCEPE.JCENCE MEDINA ALE ANTTI 712 S+M yr axs vcanl J P T— 308 725 BaTY.. wosn: Fkidm MM"_e 305 _ NAFLEYWOOD ALE 1 TwP Taw PLAN 'Low, 381 1W, ' 74 714 716 ELMO L*" d WAiERTOYN GRG40 Yt1AYZ0.TA 8 ..:'? 46. NTP LANDFALL 'TW y,• HUOSCN 1"4ETRdSTA rAe:Ac + ettiu 'wO[p-i'.o .. i 0. Wae3E.a Nor+wor ] WaT ' MOUND nErras.x _ 728 1+• - wp -° 776 vJrlr vv 387 752 STSCNIFACiJS aa,Yi.st+q. YdRL4ErORKA s- .--- -- - .. x 1TTm AFTON Trry 60 T»9NOREV000- MAY9i SA.PALL Vx"Cr 721 Pte, TIP _ .".. - 3179 IM, SAINT T" PAm 722C,m W CYASKA EAC 608 Gey COTTAGE T N ff CRed GROVE iJ394r397 — — 610 GROVE 1, Tw aai.3 ; -' REIGlTTS Twp Y"K' omGR" KM COLOCNJ- Try -" fit: kiu, 640 aL•RYsn+YE - - ` 17AkeY-M.." Da;3— Te 5HF:5G_E 61 616 FRESYOTTTp644 Wkc— Au BW4TA SAVAGE Twp CARVER. I . IT,y 61 2 A% -LE RCi5EMO6'NT NGS +'P T+P Twp VALLET y rvr nN F a 6267x Twp LM=-ViLLE 624 370 FT—. T n 31 LT p FAii"' y TOHt BELLE HAS N NEW MW-SVQLE PLAUJE TRIER e Eueka Twp C.W Red H T-9 650 V 2 Y Durra 630 YF:.4OERSCN RAN GraJnlNa wawtm sru Tr—. - T,w Twp Twp He°:4arscks T -V Twp 658 32 Trends What's Driving Your Market? By Ken Fears Manger, Regional Economics We all know that this is one of the strongest buyers' markets in years, possibly decades. But there is a lot of confusion about what is driving it; the $8,000 first-time home buyer tax credit, falling prices, record low mortgage rates, or improved confidence? Millions 5.6 5.4 5.2 5.0 4.8 4.6 4.4 Tax Credit Moves the U.S. Market 220,000 210,000 200,000 190,000 180,000 170,000 a Q-9 Q, $ 160,000 07d„ `0d inti 1/{` V 10 1%1004016 k 'Lk yy 11> vii Vol `">,> Sales —Median Price It is hard to say which factor sparked this summer's up -tick. By most accounts, though, the majority of first-time home buyers who purchased knew about the first-time home buyer tax credit and were eager to take advantage of it. Given that the share of first time buyers is at its highest levels in years, it's fair to assume that the recent improvement is owed in large part to this credit. However, the current tax credit is far from perfect and what's more, it is set to expire in November. The first-time homebuyer tax credit allows a new buyer a refund of $8,000 in their taxes if they purchase a home. However, since the only way to get the moneys from the credit is to file with the IRS after the purchase, a buyer cannot use the $8,000 for closing. The Treasury and HUD have made efforts to get state governments to create programs that would enable buyers to use the credit money at the time of purchase. In effect, the HUD suggested that state governments make zero -interest loans to first-time buyers for $8,000. The first time buyers would then pay back these loans when they receive their credit from the IRS. Unfortunately, given the current environment of tight budgets, few state governments created such programs. Thus, the $8,000 may help new buyers to afford improvements and new appliances after a purchase, an added economic boost, but it doesn't help to facilitate the transaction. A second issue with the current tax credit is that it is relatively small. Here in the market covered by North Star MLS, the average selling price is $195,788. Even though this credit money cannot be used at close, it could be used to reduce the principal by 5.1% for the average mortgage (assuming a down payment of 20%) or 4.2% of the average mortgage insured by the FHA (assuming a 3.5% down payment). This translates to a reduction of a buyer's monthly payment from $ 880 to $ 844 under the private financing situation or from $1,061 to $1,018 under the FHA situation. Even if your buyer doesn't qualify to use the first time buyer tax credit, your buyer will still benefit. Purchases by first-time buyers unlock equity for trade up buyers to make their purchase. Furthermore, the sheer volume of sales stimulated by this tax credit helps to stabilize prices, boosting buyer confidence and easing access to PMI. By most accounts, the current first-time homebuyer tax credit has helped stimulate demand in the housing market at a time when it was necessary to bring down high inventory levels and stabilize prices, But the program suffers from two big problems. With the tax credit expiring in November and calls for its renewal, there is also the opportunity for improvement. 45 Commentary Help for a Sustainable Recovery by Lawrence Yun, NAR ChiefEconomist While we listen to the animated discussions surrounding the health care debate, war strategies, flu vaccines and Nobel Peace Prizes, the federal budget deficit continues to rise. There is certainly no delight in watching the budget deficit soar. The $1.4 trillion deficit in the 2004 fiscal year to September is the highest ever in U.S. history– both in sheer dollar figures as well as the highest since the Second World War if measured in relation to the overall economic pie. It's a huge burden to future generations. Why should we be concerned:' Because continuing high budget deficits could easily cause interest rates to rise much sooner–and possibly quite sharply. Yes, there will be arguments about what federal programs work and which ones j ust bleed money. But Washington needs to come out with a credible plan to reduce the deficit over time. Meanwhile, price correction–and over -correction– have wreaked havoc on the broader economy. Wall Street balance sheets were bleeding heavily before the big help from the $700 billion TARP funding. Property owners felt it, too. foreclosures spiked, strategic defaults rose among financially capable but underwater homeowners, and appraisals became messier. Most importantly in terms of economic impact, the bulk ofAmerican families have experienced a major hit to their wealth accumulation—by more than $4 trillion in the past three years. The economy will have a difficult time gaining firm footing without government life support ifhome values continue to fall. One area where federal taxpayer dollars have been effectively utilized is that first-time homebuyer tax credit. The key to any future sustainable economic recovery lies in home values stabilizing or, better yet, a return to a historical home price appreciation rate of 3 to 5 percent each year. The bubble prices crash landed, but all the excesses have already been removed. In fact, one could legitimately argue that home values have overshot downward. Price -to -income ratio is now below the historical average. The monthly mortgage payment for a middle income person buying a middle priced home is well below its historical norm. A review of the latest data strongly suggests that the homebuyer tax credit has had its intended impact of significantly stimulating home sales. From about 4.5 million annualized home sales pace in the few months prior to the stimulus, sales have jumped to 5.1 million in recent months. That is a change of 600,000 additional existing -home sales. New home sales have risen from the mid 300,000 to low 400,000 range over the similar period. The rise in sales has been concentrated in the lower-priced home segment largely because fust -time buyers are looking to stay, rightly, well within their budget. Housing inventories, while stili higher than desired levels, have been trimmed. The latest 8 -month supply of existing -home inventory is much better than the double-digit figures of last year. Home values have likewise moved in an "improving" direction. Broadly speaking, they are down from one year ago, but the declines have been less steep in recent months compared to the pre -stimulus times. The median existing -home price as ofAugust was down 12.5 percent compared to a nearly 20 percent decline early in the year. In short, sales have risen and home prices are on the verge of stabilizing. But the housing stimidus package is set to expire. A settlement, and not the contract signing to buy, must occur by the end ofNovember. Some first-time buyers who are signing contracts to buy in October just may make the deadline. It would be pity ifthe housing market which is just on the cusp of a self-sustaining recovery rolls downhill again. That could happen if potential buyers step back and inventory returns to an upward climb. Falling home values – independent of -whether it is over - 46 Commentary correcting or not—will bring back all the associated collateral damage. A much happier scenario would be that the buying momentum continues for few additional quarters so that inventory falls back down to the normal 5 to 7 months, a level consistent with home value stabilization. Once that is accomplished, the consumer "fear factor" of waiting and waiting for a lower price later will no longer be part of the home buying decision. We will have reached a point ofhousing market self -sustainability. Consumer confidence will be lifted. The wealth impact of consumers opening up wallets for general consumer goods will steadily turn positive. Thus, the broader economy also gets set for a sustainable recovery without needing finther stimulus dollars. For that happy scenario to play out, a time extension on the home buyer tax credit is critically needed. At a cost of about $10 billion (if extended through the middle of next year), the housing market will likely have recovered nicely with the broader economy on track for a solid robust expansion. That $10 billion price tag is rather modest compared to the $700 billion in TARP funding and $800 billion of the broader economic stimulus package that was passed early in the year (with debate still raging over the effectiveness of that broad spending bill). Moreover, the cost of $ 10 billion is a static measure that does not take into account job creations and increased tax revenue from rising economic activity. Actually, if we take into consideration all of the economic dynamic responses, the homebuyer tax credit can be argued as a net positive revenue generator for the federal government. There is nothing like economic growth to dent budget deficits. If the economy was already at full capacity, the housing stimulus would simply be moving dollars from one sector of the economy to another. But as is fully visible out in the streets, we are nowhere near full capacity. Factory capacity utilization was 69.6 percent in August, compared to an 80 percent rate that should be the case in normal economic times. On the job market front, the country is facing a double-digit unemployment rate rather than the healthy 5 or 6 percent unemployment rate. Therefore, there is a plenty of room for growth for a win-win situation for the housing market and other sectors of the economy. Despite these vast potential benefits to the economy from extending the homebuyer tax credit, valid questions should nonetheless be asked. Is there any pent-up demand remaining? Will the tax credit just go to the people who would have bought a home anyway and thereby will simply pocket the $8,000 check? Well, the following table shows a compelling case for tapping the financially healthy renter population. In 2000, before the housing market boom, there were 11.5 million renter households who had the necessary income to buy a median priced home at prevailing market conditions. Today, the pool of renters who can buy a median priced home is over 16 million. Just nudging even a small share — say 5 percent— of these financially healthy renters into buying via a tax credit check will mean 800,000 additional home sales. That number is sufficiently meaningful to get the inventory down to the level ofhome value stabilization. The housing market will then be on the path to a self-sustaining recovery. After what we have been through this decade, it would be quite nice to observe a return of a "boring" housing market with annual price growth of a steady and normal 3 to 5 percent - without any of the fits, frenzy, and panic. A faster and firmer recovery can happen if the tax credit is opened up to more buyers by making it apply to any bit yers — just just first -timers —and by raising the income limit for qualification. It would also contribute to healthy economic activity — a sustained recovery — and thus help to put a dent in the deficit. In short— it's a win/win. NAR is working hard to get that homebuyer tax credit extended You can help—by calling, writing or emailing your Congressional representatives. It's good forhome buyers, it's good for REALTORSO, and it's good for the U.S. economy. 47 Economic Monitor This table reflects data available through July 3rd of 1009. Likely Direction Recent over the Next Forecast Monthly Indicator Statistics six Months Existing Home Sales slipped 2.7% in August to a seasonally adjusted The strength of annual rate of 5.10 million units — 3.4% above their sales level in August of Aug 09 5,100 recovery depends 2008. The national median sales price for an existing home was $177,700. Jul 09 5,240 on tax credit The inventory of existing homes available for sale at the end of August fell Aug 08 4,930 extension to 3.62 million units — an 8.5 -month supply at the current sales pace. New Home Sales rose slightly in August, posting a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 429,000 units — 0.7%© ahead of July's revised rate of Aug 09 429 To rise from rock 426,000. New home inventory continued to decline to a 7.3 month supply at July 09 426 bottom levels the current sales rate. That is down 3.9% from the previous month and Aug 08 444 more than 34% off its year-ago level. Housing Starts also posted a small increase in August, registering 598,000 Aua09 598 Along way to go units — up 1.5% from July's level of 589,000. Despite the rise in August, July 09 589 until full recovery starts were still 29.6% below their level a year ago. Building permits — Aug 08 849 but still trending up generally a reliable indicator of future starts — posted a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 579,000 — 2.7% above July's level. Housing AffordabWty continued at very healthy levels. NAR's Na meaningful Housing Affordability Index (HAI) posted a reading of 159.1 in August — Aug 09 159.1 July 09 1555 changes to income, up from Julys reading of 155.5 and significantly higher than the 125.8 home value, or reading in August of 2008. Aug8 1258ug . mortgage rates Mortgage Rates remain at historic lows. The average rate on a 30 -year fixed mortgage loan was 5.42% in June. While an increase from May's Sept 09 5.06% Slowly inching average rate of 4.86%, it is well below the 6.32% average in June of 2008. Aug 09 5.19% higher As the economy begins to turn the corner, look for mortgage rates to inch Sept 08 6.04% upward although remaining well below 6% for the foreseeable future. Employment The economy shed 263,000 jobs in September— a larger June 09-263 Finally to get a nct number than anticipated and a sign that despite other encouraging figures May 09 -201 gain in few on the economy, the job market remains a drag on a more robust economic 12 -month months after moretrecovery. The unemployment rate rose to 9.8% — its highest level since total: -5,843 than 7 million job June of 1983. cuts Economic Growth The U.S. economy showed some improvement in the 2nd quarter of this year. Real GDP growth registered -0.7% — a 2009:11 -0.7% Production significant increase from the -6.4% figure in the 1 st quarter Going 2009:I -6.4% recovery intact forward, GDP growth should turn positive in the 3rd quarter, but 2008:11 -1.5% consumer spending activity may be tempered by the still -worrisome job market. Notes: All rate are seasonally adjusted. New home sales, existing home safes, and housingstarts are shown in thousands. Employment growth is shown as month-to-month change in thousands. Inflation is shown as the month-to-month change in the Consumer Price Index. Sources; LIAR, Bureau of the Census, Bureau of r.abar Statistics, Freddie lilac, and the blortgase Bankers Association M No 0 i historicQI ' AVERAGE SALES PRICE BY AREA includes single family detached homes, condominiums townhomes and twin homes 300 Mpts - Calhoun -Isles S372,783 5376.014 5400,679 376,850 S371,228 5344,713 7.1% 7.5% 301 Mpts - Camden 160.181 167.835 S161,503 5731.951 75,525 568.324 9.5% 57.3% 302 Mpls - Central S311,092 292.259 310,890 S321,485 337,539 5324,897 3.71/. 41.4% 303 Mpis - Longfellow 214,740 S230,724 220.009 5221,695 193.444 169,592 12.3% 21.0% 304 Mpls- Nokomis 222,753 5234,723 239,916 236,460 215,963 194,210 10.1% 12.8% 305 Mp4s-North 166,316 164,711 152.386 102,472 60,291 54.598 9.4% 67.2% 306 MP15 - Northeast S200,433 5209,408 214,645 199,509 5165,998 5147.361 11.2% 26.5% 307 Mpis - Phillips 171,434 S183,644 5207,470 5167.278 S97,949 S92,495 5.6% 46.0% 308 Mpls - Powderhorn 5182.077 191,507 S182,790 168.494 S124,910 5115,203 7.8% 36.7% 309 Mpis - Southwest 5312,662 337,187 351,213 5366,837 332.018 295,453 11.0% 5,5% 310 Mpis - University 238,359 254,452 259,903 257,249 218,806 196,796 10.1% 17.4% 340 Buffalo SKOM5 S234,081 5243.47E 223.694 5199,711 5156,806 21.5% 29.0% 341 Wright County{except Buffalo) S220.336 240,737 5241,167 233,432 199,193 171.069 I 14,1% 22.4% 342 Hutchinson 156.348 175,285 5174,256 174,986 155,060 140,900 9.1% 9.9% 343 McLeod County 162,345 163,278 172.331 146.530 135,757 S105,351 22.4% 35.1% 360 Robbinsdale 191.655 193,788 203,446 200,666 161,950 5143,048 11.7% 25.4% 361 crystal 189.943 201,712 199,043 194,025 162,605 139,563 14.2% 26.5% 362 New Hope 209,631 219,661 217,184 217,058 183,196 S160,952 12.1% 23.2% 363 Brooklyn Center 5183,204 194,673 191,112 5173,079 S118,074 96,721 18.1% 47.2% 364 Brooklyn Park S228,739 5249,100 252,182 S240,856 190.531 148,894 21.9% 34.9% 365 Maple Grove/Osseo 5263,802 S290,559 5309.000 323.881 S316,224 5268.567 15.1% 1.8% 366 Champlin S238,531 253,228 262,969 240,964 S215,055 176,469 17.9% 26.0% 367 Hennepin -North 5275.936 S296,400 313,133 5299,334 274,010 230,567 15.9% 16.4% 368 Hennepin -Northwest 5491,145 5525,196 518,280 5525,860 S453,968 369,723 18.6% 24.7% 370 Sibtey County 5137,194 Si58,823 145,215 S145.261 113,715 597,995 13,13% 28.5% 373 Golden Valley 5289,372 S311.181 327,862 5328,249 5312.842 250,651 19.9% 13.4% 374 Plymouth 310,181 5323,397 S323,984 329,845 320,017 291,859 8.8% 5.9% 378 Richfield 211,765 221,325 223.511 215.789 S185253 159.558 13.9% 24.7% 379 Bloomington -East 197.713 217,692 233,552 S213.205 188,577 5160,556 14.9% 18.8% 380 Bloomington -West 259.561 281,060 273,064 271,557 251,380 227,806 9.4% 12.2% 381 Lake Mdnnetcnka 5582.709 5628,052 5708,266 5635.302 593,527 5512,214 13.7% 12.1% 385 Edina 408.077 5441,629 S502.293 490,812 5528,724 5418.853 20.8% 2.6% 386 Hopkins S184,077 S207,712 S221,004 207,456 5200,110 5176,549 11.6% 4.1% 387 Minnetonka 339.495 357,408 5337.003 346,445 319,978 S284,113 11.2% 16.3% 391 Saint Louis Park 228.848 247,751 251,125 253,283 247,163 230,169 6.9% 0.6% 392 Eden Prairie 349,929 376.513 364,710 409.116 350,902 5308,152 12.2% 11.9% 394 Carver County 5250,057 259,279 S294,378 5256.979 5240.161 S204,675 14.8% 18.1% 396 Chanhassen 5356,428 5355.671 369,176 5397,934 378,839 S354,811 6.3% 0,5% 397 Chaska 275,384 5281,832 276,162 5277,074 266.521 218,111 18.2% 20.8% 398 Victoria 369.861 473.886 470.522 437,151 5424,885 336,167 20.9% 9.1% 600 West St. Paul 200,138 212.530 210,828 5190,456 165,561 136,862 17.3% 31.6% 602 South St. Paul 179,136 200.721 5199,666 S189.994 S156,801 130,482 16.8% 27.2% 604 MendotalUlydalelMendcta Heights 368.311 396,289 5395.552 S438,032 S329.596 5291,988 11.4% 20.7% 605 Sunfish Lake 5862,847 S757,500 5670,750 S1,114,667 51,260,625 5830,000 34.2% 6.0% 508 Inver Grave Heights 5253,054 S276,759 5265.929 S264,766 227,421 5209,498 7.9% 17.2% 610 Eagan 244,888 5254,617 261.426 262,609 5240.878 205,601 14.6% 16.0% 612 Burnsville S230,457 5245,382 5243,384 235,131 211,080 186,602 11.6% 19.0% 614 Apple Valley 5229,816 249,709 253,344 5243,015 229,652 194.392 15.4% 15.4% 616 Rosemount 250,870 265,800 283.737 S277,473 5244,896 223,461 8.8% 10.9% 617 Hastings 228,748 225,167 219.956 225,945 S195,051 5169.912 12.9% 25.7% 618 Eastern Dakota County 269.507 329,748 280,492 298,198 S278,600 218,162 21,7% 19.1% 624 Farmington 238,404 240,155 5244,374 235,212 207,982 181.359 12.8% 23.9% 626 Lakeville 299,246 S312,927 314,021 302,571 279,123 240,822 13.7% 19.5% 628 Southern Dakota Courtly 269,598 5297,738 276.450 5243,169 5276,817 S191,560 30.8% 28.9% 630 Northfield 242,523 5252.952 243,849 5237,795 209.620 186,143 11.2% 23.2% 632 Rice County 191,298 S212,516 S205.619 194.132 5163,537 148,469 9.2% 22.4% 640 Shakopee 243,159 5250,869 259,186 255,088 5230,856 5195.077 15.5% 19.8% 642 Prior Lake 325,929 380.227 5357,891 344,549 S355,229 S283.444 20.2% 13.0% 644 Savage 5279.813 5288,856 5294,152 5281,927 5259,517 5225,757 13.0% 19.31Y 646 Jordan 5254,139 5288,295 5283,754 260.672 5233,099 SZ07,830 10.9% 18.25_ 648 New Prague 5251,564 S299.343 5285.347 5259.876 5226,299 5213,642 5.6% 15.1% 650 Belle Plaine S226,760 S221,918 214.030 215,763 8173,885 154,258 11.3% 32.0% 658 Le SueurlRice 160.208 5184,112 183.706 177.416 5168.644 119,578 29.1% 25.4% 14 Minneapolis area Association of REALTORS historical A MEDIAN SALES PRICE BY AREA includes sirrgfe family detached home; condominiums, townhomes and twin homes 12 Minneapolis Area Association nr REALTORS' e Area 2rr4 2005 2006 2007 2008rt Change 00-00 Change 4.5% 12.4% 300 Mpls - Calh0un-Isles $262,500 5260,000 $263,500 $256.000 5240,900 $230,000 301 Mpls - Camden 157,900 5163,800 5163,000 129.459 560,000 551,900 13.5% 67.1% 302 Mpls - Central 256.500 249,000 270,050 278,850 5275,945 5246,750 10.6% 318% 303 Mpts - Longfellow 200,000 212.200 5208,000 5210,500 5188,500 171.500 4 -9.0% 14.3% 304 Mpls - Nokomis 5210,000 5223,496 5225.000 224,200 5208,000 189,900 8.7% 9.6% 305 Mpls - North 5149;900 159.900 5150,000 591,000 44,313 38,500 13.1% 74.3% 306 Mpls - Northeast 5795,650 206,125 210.000 5197,388 5167,500 5151.000 9.9% 22.8% 307 Mpls - Phillips 169,500 5176,590 189.600 5165,478 587,550 89,050 1.7% 47.5% 308 Mpls - Powderhorn 5184,500 5792,000 18.4,000 5770,000 5119,900 5710,000 8.3% 40.4% 309 Mpls - Southwest 268,500 285,000 287,000 309000 275,000 260,000 5.5% 3.2% 310 Mpis - University 235,000 242,000 240,000 5242,500 203,000 195,000 3.9% 170% 340 Buffalo 5203,000 200,250 214,950 195,000 172.500 5745,000 15.9% 28.6% 341 Wright County (except Buffalo) 5197,700 5218,864 5218.650 210,000 5180,000 5156,000 13.3% 21.1% 342 Hutchinson S143,000 5160,000 161,000 5162,050 149,000 124,950 16.1% 12.6% 343 McLeod County 5742,800 158,050 154,200 5142,931 5124,900 99.000 20.7% 30.7% 360 Robbinsdale 190,000 196,950 206,000 203,000 160,025 5748,750 7.0% 21.7% 361 Crystal 5786,700 197,900 198,000 193,650 5161,000 142,000 11.8% 23.9% 362 New Hope 215,450 5225,000 227,300 220,000 186000 5158,000 15.1% 26.7% 363 Brooklyn Center 5183,500 5195,000 192,675 5174,300 5115,500 590,000 22.1% 51.0% 364 Brooklyn Park 215,900 229,900 230,000 220,000 5174.600 135000 22.7% 37.5% 365 Maple GroveiOsseo 224,900 5243,200 5247,000 253,750 5247,900 219,348 11.5% 2.5% 366 Champlin 5217,000 227,000 234,OOO 218,111 199,900 162,000 19.0% 25.3% 367 Hennepin -North 5252.000 285,000 291,000 283,800 249.900 224,950 10.0% 10.7% 368 Herinepin-Northwest 360,000 400,000 377,000 369,000 310,000 255,000 17.7% 29,2% 370 Sibley County 5135,000 145,300 141,100 5132,750 110,000 588,888 19.2% 34.2% 373 Golden Valley 249,450 262.000 5267,900 272,400 257,450 220,000 14.5% 11.8% 374 Plymouth 274,950 290,000 293,500 5294,000 5279,000 253,500 9.1% 7.8% 378 Richfield 211,250 221,000 223,000 217,500 5185,500 165,000 11.1% 21,9% 379 Bloomington -East 5205,000 221,650 225,000 210,250 180,000 157.625 12.4% 23.1% 380 Bioomington-West 5234,900 249,900 247.000 5245,000 5226,000 5210,000 7.1% 10.6% 381 Lake Minnetonka 400,000 427,500 5475.000 400,863 5385,000 5339.500 11.8% 15.1% 385 Edina 5322,700 357,000 389,500 378000 387,500 324,950 16.1% 0.7% 386 Hopkins 178,450 190.950 5205,900 5205,000 5170,000 164,900 3,0% 7.6% 387 Minnetonka 281,400 5292,000 270,000 285,000 263,500 242,000 8.2% 14.0% 391 Seim Louis Park 215,300 230.000 233,000 5233,500 226,950 5212,500 6.4% 1.3% 392 Eden Praide 282,796 S294,900 5288,780 315,250 5280,000 251,750 10.1% 11.0% 394 Carver County 5221,000 5235,000 5244,250 5232,000 218,000 186.000 14.7% 15.8% 396 Chanhassen 5288,000 5290,000 295.000 5317,143 5295,000 280,000 5.1% 2.8% 397 Chaska 234,950 5240,250 5233,150 246,000 5230,500 5178,500 22.6% 24.0% 398 Victoria 345,000 388,700 475,1100 5407,500 401,000 5326,950 18.5% 5.2% 600 West St. Paul 190.000 203,000 203,175 189,000 163,004 134,900 17.2% 29.0% 602 South SL Paul 180,006 5196,900 197,000 182,000 159,000 132.000 17.0% 26.7% 604 MendotailllydalelMendota Heights 319,000 333,000 5371,000 5382,500 294.000 5260,000 11.6% 18,5% 605 Sunfish Lake 780,000 5650,000 5696,500 1,110,000 51,051,250 830,000 21.0% 6.4% 608 Inver Grove Heights 5209,500 5221,000 205,900 209,900 190,000 5165,751 12.8% 20.9% 610 Eagan 224,000 5232,500 237,900 5242,000 215,000 183,000 14.9% 18.3% 612 Burnsville 221,700 5237,000 232.900 5225,000 201,647 175,010 13.2% 21.1% 614 Apple Valley 209,000 224,665 226,500 224,900 205,000 177,000 16.6% 18.2% 616 Rosemount 227,900 5238,400 5248,900 5244,900 5216,900 194,000 10.6% 14.9% 617 Hastings 203,000 200,620 201,325 5196,000 5175,000 150,000 14.3% 26.1% 618 Eastern Dakota County 5259,900 300,000 248,30) 5250,000 5288.500 5240„000 16.8% 7.7% 624 Farmington 221,000 230,000 232,250 224,000 195,730 5175,000 10.6% 20.8% 626 Lakeville 267,250 5279.000 5279,700 262,000 250.000 224,188 10.3% 116,11% 0 628 Southern Dakota County 249,900 254,500 237,300 238,000 256,500 169,700 33.8% 32.1% 630 Northfield i 5220,000 230,000 5220,850 215,075 5189,000 5171,425 9.3% I 22.1% 632 Rice County I 5171,000 5194,350 5189,000 5172,250 5148,500 140.000 5.7% 18.1% i 640 Shakopee 5206,500 217,000 5218,900 220,050 199,875 S175,000 12.4% 15.3% 642 Prior Lake 5272,750 298,597 279,450 5277,000 5264,400 5240.000 9.2% 12.0% 644 Savage 257,900 264,900 5267.500 5257,OOO 5241,000 5212,000 12.0% 17.8% 646 Jordan S223,900 5255,000 250,650 250,000 5219,950 202,000 8.2% 9.8% 648 New Prague 225,000 5253,000 250,000 228,500 5210,000 5198,000 5,7% 12.0% 650 Belle Plaine IIII $210,000 217,000 5213,7CO 207,900 175,250 5150,500 14.1% 658 Le SueurlRice i $146,000 _ 165.000 5164,450 5160,500 5150,000 5110,000 i 26.7% 12 Minneapolis Area Association nr REALTORS' unit safes data', 2009 TwI N CITIES HOME SALES includes single fomil detached homes, condominiums, townhomes and twin homes 6 Minneapolis Area Association of REALTORS" Area Sales Mediated P err-ent_7;_ Percent': ConstructionCode 300 Mpls - Calhoun -Isles 443 i 88 19.9% Owned 411 92.8% 32 7.2% 195 44.0% 124 56.0% 301 Mpls- Camden 912 610 65.9% 904 99.1% 8 0.9% 897 98.4% 15 1.6% 302 Mpls- Central 587 104 17.7% 385 65.6% 202 34.4% j. 6 1.0% 581 99.0% 303 i Mpls- Longfellow I 386 124 32.1% 384 99.5% 2 0.5% 375 97.2% 11 2.8% 304 Mprs- Nokomis 843 236 28.0% 837 99.3% 6 0.7% 800 94.9% 43 5.1% 305 Mpts - North 663 514 77.5% 645 97.3% is 2.7% 653 98.5% 10 1.5% 306 Mpls- Northeast 538 211 39.2% 525 97.6% , 13 2.4% 502 93.3% 36 6.7% 307 Mpls - Phillips 131 90 68.7% 116 88.5% 15 11.5% 88 67.2% 43 32.8% 308 Mpls - Powderhorn 545 313 57.4% 543 99.6% 2 0.4% 490 89.9% 55 10.1% 309 Mpls - Southwest 721 132 18.3% 715 99.2% 6 0.8% 665 92.2% 56 7.8% 310 Mpls- University 135 52 38.5% 98 72.6% 37 27.4% 71 52.6% 64 47.4% 340 Buffalo 278 170 61.2% 259 93.2% 19 6.8% 226 81.3% 52 18.7% 341 Wright County (except Buffalo) 1.603 916 57.1% 1,328 82.8% 275 17.2% 1,275 79.5% 328 20.5% 342 Hutchinson 211 68 32.2% 204 96.7% 7 3.3% 191 90.5% 20 9.5% 343 McLeod County 178 97 54.5% 173 97.2% 5 2.8% 167 93.8% 11 6.2% 360 Robbinsdale 267 98 37.5% 252 96.6% 9 3.4% 239 91.6% 22 8.4% 361 Crystal 382 161 42.1% 375 98.2% 7 1.8% 367 96.1% 15 3.9% 362 New Hope 225 103 45.8% 222 98.7% 3 1.3% 167 74.2% 58 25.8% 363 Brooklyn Center 675 457 67.7% 673 99.7% 2 0.3% 596 88.3% 79 11.7% 364 Brooklyn Park 1,531 1,006 65.7% 1,457 95.2% 74 4.8% 1.182 77.2% 349 22.8% 365 Maple GrovelOsseo 1,019 292 28.7% 864 84.8% 155 15-2% 653 64.1% 366 35.9% 366 Champlin 324 167 51.5% 313 96.6% 11 3.4% 275 84.9% 49 15.1% 367 Hennepin -North 184 99 53.8% 154 83.7% 30 16.3% 154 83.7% 30 16.3% 368 Hennepin -Northwest 186 84 45.2% 168 90.3% 18 9.7% 155 63.3% 31 16.7% 370 Sibley County 121 80 49.6% 119 98.3% 2 1.7% 118 97.5% 3 2.5% 373 Golden Valley 255 73 28.6% 253 99.2% 2 0.8% 215 84.3% 40 15.7% 374 Plymouth 839 174 20.7% 756 90.1% 83 9.9% 492 56.6% 347 41.4% 378 Richfield 553 214 38.7% 553 100.0% 0 0.0% 512 92.6% 41 7.4% 379 Bloomington -East 355 146 41.1% 338 95.2% 17 4.8% 289 81.4% 66 18.6% 380 Bloomington -West 544 145 26.7% 542 99.6% 2 0.4% 378 69.5% 166 30.5 381 Lake Minnetonka 702 229 32.6% 639 91.0% 63 9.0% 599 85.3% 103 14.7% 385 Edina 647 78 12.1% 615 95.1% 32 4.9% 416 64.3% 231 35.7% 386 Hopkins 196 85 43.4% 192 9B.0% 4 2.0% 95 48.5% 101 51.5% 387 Minnetonka 634 190 30.0% 614 96.8% 20 3.2% 410 64.7% 224 35.3% 391 Saint Louis Park 670 117 17.5% 649 96.9% 21 3.1% 505 75.4% 165 24.6% 392 Eden Prairie 772 197 25.5% 739 95.7% 33 4.3% 409 53.0% 363 47.0% 394 Carver County 406 146 36.0% 359 88.4% 47 11.6% 333 82.0% 73 18.0% 396 Chanhassen 314 74 23.6% 267 85.0% 47 15.0% 213 67.8% 101 32.2% 397 Chaska 307 113 36.8% 264 86.0% 43 14.0% 183 59.6% 124 40.4% 398 Victoria 92 17 18.5% 69 75.0% 23 25.0% 78 84.8% 14 15.2% 600 West SL Paul 257 115 44.7% 255 99.2% 2 0.8% 201 76.2% 56 21.8% 602 South St. Paul 323 181 56.0% 317 98.1% 6 1.9% 295 91.3% 28 8.7% 604 MendotaiLilydaleiMendota Heights 136 26 19.1% 127 93.4% 9 6.6% 73 53.7% 63 46.3% 605 Sunfish Lake 1 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 0 0.0% 1 100.0% 0 0-01/6 608 Inver Grove Heights 296 130 43.9% 265 96.3% 11 3.7% 152 51.4% 144 48.6% 610 Eagan 740 276 37.3% 726 98.1% 14 1.9% 400 54.1% 340 45.9% 612 Burnsville 680 279 41.0% 662 97.4% 18 2.6% 379 55.7% 301 44.3% 614 Apple Valley 777 311 40.0% 754 97.0% 23 3.0% 375 48.3% 402 51.7% 616 Rosemount 348 127 36.5% 285 81.9% 63 18.1% 219 62.9% 129 37.1% 617 Hastings 298 136 45.6% 282 94.6% 16 5.4% 189 63.4% 109 36.6% 518 Eastern Dakota County 17 6 35.3% 17 100.0% 0 0.0% 17 100-0% 0 0.0% 624 Farmington 467 211 45.2% 413 86.4% 54 11.6% 342 73.2% 125 26.8% 626 Lakeville 677 258 38.1% 597 88.2% 80 11.8% 495 73.1% 182 26.9% 628 Southern Dakota County 18 7 38.9% 18 100.0% 0 0.0% 18 100.0% 0 0-0% 630 Northfield 252 68 33.6% 222 84.7% 40 15.3% 176 67.2% 86 32.8% 632 Rice County 404 176 43.6% 365 90.3% 39 9.7% 367 90.8% 37 9-2% 640 Shakopee 705 345 48.9% 574 81.4% 131 18.6% 397 56.3% 308 43.7% 642 Prior Lake 469 186 39.7% 397 84.6% 72 15.4% 339 72.3% 130 27.7% 644 Savage 419 157 37,5% 379 90.5% 40 9.5% 275 65.6% 144 34.4% 646 Jordan 81 48 59.3% 72 88.9% 9 11.1% 76 93.8% 5 6. 648 New Prague 372 195 52.4% 316 84.9% 56 15.1% 324 87.1% 48 12.9% 650 l Belle Plaine 130 79 60.8% 116 69.2% 14 10-8% 124 95.4% 6 4.6% 65$ Le SueurJRice 1$3 87 44.3% 180 98.4% 3 1.6% 165 90.2% 18 9:8% 6 Minneapolis Area Association of REALTORS" price data 2009 Twl N CIT1 Es H o M E SALES includes single family detached homes, condominiums, tcwnhomes and twin homes Median Average Days g. Price PerList 300 Area Mpls- Calhoon -Isles Price S230,000 Price 344,713 to Sale 155 Price Received I 91.4% Square Footage 1,713 rY I S186 301 Mpls- Camden 51,900 S68,324 106 95.5% 1,345 f1111 S51 302 Mpls - Central 246,750 5324,897 123 93.8% 1,335 S225 303 Mpls- Longfellow 5171,500 169,692 84 95.8% II 1,284 134 304 Mpls- Nokomis 5189,900 194,210 86 95.8% i 1,481 i $133 305 Mpls - North 538.500 S54,598 108 96.7% 1,541 36 306 Mpls- Northeast 5151.000 147,361 110 94.3% 1,450 S105 307 Mpls - Phillips 89,050 92,495 165 91.9% 1,443 S67 308 Mpls - Powderhom 110,000 115.203 124 94.7% 1.488 82 309 Mpls - Southwest 260,000 295.453 103 94.3% 1,756 165 310 Mpls- University 195,000 196,796 174 91.4% 1.426 141 340 Buffalo 5145,000 5156,806 131 93.0% 1.891 S84 341 Wright County (except Buffalo) 156.000 5171,069 149 92.1% 1,872 S94 342 Hutchinson 5124,950 5140,900 152 90.0% 1,908 S74 343 McLeod County S99,000 5105,351 189 87.3% 1,675 S64 360 Robbin5dale 148,750 143.048 141 91.9% 1,529 94 361 Crystal 5142.000 5139,563 116 913% 1,583 90 362 New Hope 5158.000 160,952 128 92.5% 1,779 91 363 Brooklyn Center 590,000 596,721 140 94.5% 1,608 62 364 Brooklyn Park 5135,000 148,894 136 94.4% j 1,897 76 365 Maple GrovelOsseo 5219,348 268.567 123 93.4% 1 2,266 S115 366 Champlin 162,000 176,469 114 93.3% 1.904 S93 367 Hennepin -North 224,950 5230.567 164 91.5% 2,360 99 368 Hennepin -Northwest S255,000 369,723 177 90.9% 2,850 122 370 Sibley County 88,888 597.995 154 89.5% 1,622 S61 373 Golden Valley 220,000 3250.651 146 I 92.8% 2,089 120 374 Plymouth 253.500 5291,859 134 92.1% 2,302 125 378 Richfield 165.000 5159,558 113 93.5% 1,598 5102 379 Bloomington -Fast 5157,625 S160,556 114 94.1% 1,506 112 380 Bloomington -West 210,000 5227,806 140 92.5% 11999 5114 381 Lake Minnetonka S339,500 S512,214 204 88.6% 2,868 5167 385 Edina 324,950 5418,853 148 91.3% 2,282 5171 386 Hopkins 164,900 S176,549133 90.8% 1.513 S109 387 Minnetonka 5242.000 S284.113 153 91.8% 2,254 S124 391 Saint Louis Park 212.500 S230,169 118 93.1% 1,583 145 392 Eden Prairie 251.750 308,152 153 92.1% 2,445 123 394 Carver County 186.000 5204,675 147 91.8% 2,007 102 396 Chanhassen 280,000 354,811 141 90.9% 2,623 5130 397 Chaska S178,500 5218,111 125 92.8% 2,018 S106 398 Victoria S326,950 5336,167 157 92.5% 2,634 5126 600 i West St.Paul I 5134,900 136,862 120 92.7% 1,486 93 602 South SL Paul 132,000jjj 5130.482 127 92.3% 1,532 88 604 Mendotall-ilydalelMendota Heights 260.000 II 291,988 188 89.4% 2,364 S126 605 Sunfish Lake 830,000 830,000 455 83.0% 7,950 S104 608 Enver Grove Heights 165,751 209,498 179 91.4% 1,957 103 610 Eagan 183.000 205,601 135 93.0% 1,968 103 612 Burnsville 175,000 5186.602 140 92.7% 1,987 S92 614 Apple Valley 5171,000 5194,392 135 93.8% 1,963 98 616 Rosemount 194,000 5223,461 118 94.4% 2,096 106 617 Hastings S150,000 169,912 145 91.0% 1.839 S93 678 Eastern Dakota County 240,000 218.162 187 89.3% 2.255 101 624 Farmington S175,000 181,359 143 93.1% 1,914 S95 626 Lakeville I S224,188 240,822 143 93.5% 2,295 105 628 Southern Dakota County I 169,700 5191,560 214 I 87.9% 2,114 93 630 Northfield 171,42.5 5186,143187 I 90.7% ( 1,979 96 632 Rice County 5140,000 S148,469 150 90.6% 1.189 S84 640 Shakopee 175.000 195,077 129 93.8% 1,950 5100 642 Prior Lake 5240,000 283,444 168 i 91.8% 2.494 S112 644 Savage 212,000 225,757 146 93.1% 2.241 100 646 Jordan 202,006 207,830 190 93.4% 2,211 94 548 New Prague 198.000 5213.642 141 91.6% 2,219 598 650 Belle Plaine 150,500 5154,258 155 94.3% 1,755 92 658 Le SueurlRice S110,000 5119,578 199 84.6% 1,724 568 9 Minneapolis Area Association of REALTORS9