Tucson-area home prices rose more than 6 percent in March as unit sales rose nearly 19 percent compared with the same month in 2011, according to the latest data from the Tucson Association of Realtors Multiple Listing Service.

The median price for a home sold in March was $132,900, up from $125,000 both in the prior month and in March 2011, the Realtors group said. The median price is the point at which half the homes sold for more and half sold for less, which reduces the effect of very high or low prices.

The average price rose 2.8 percent on a year-over-year basis, to $168,153.

A total of 1,387 listed homes sold in March, up 18.7 percent from March 2011.

Inventory continued to drop, with active home listings falling nearly 9 percent from February and nearly 38 percent from March 2011, the Realtors said.

And those homes are selling a little more quickly. Average days on market fell to 73, from 77 in February.

Tucson Housing Market

March 2012 Feb. 2012 March 2011 Feb. 2011

Median sale price $132,900 $125,000 $125,000 $137,000

Avg. sale price $168,153 $164,513 $163,590 $182,388

Active listings 4,168 4,560 6,703 6,947

New listings 1,971 1,720 1,623 1,487

Home sales by unit 1,387 1,019 1,169 879

Source: Tucson Association of Realtors Multiple Listing Service

Please visit Arizona Daily Star to read the original, full length post.

“In the case of Tucson, you are looking at foreclosures dropping back quite a bit coupled with a stable employment market,” says Berkowitz. The area has a 7.8% unemployment rate, a tad lower than the national average of 8.2%, helped by the presence of sizable employers in the recession-resistant education and government sectors, including the University of Arizona, Davis-Monthan Air Force Base and the U.S. Army Intelligence Center. All of this suggests Tucson’s housing market may be bottoming.

Buying a home is not a decision to be taken lightly. Personal finance gurus warn against purchasing unless you plan to keep it for a minimum of five years and, since the housing bubble burst, many say it’s best to buy only if it fits your lifestyle – not your investing portfolio.

For first-time home buyers shopping for a permanent, full-time residence, it’s advice to heed. But say you do simply want a place to park some of your hard-earned money, perhaps a fixer-upper you could occupy for a few years or maybe a house you believe you could rent out right away and easily oversee?

You wouldn’t be alone: investment-homes sales jumped 64.5% from 2010 to 2011, with investors making up 27% of all single-family, condo and co-op purchases last year, according to the National Association of Realtors. And it’s no wonder why. Home affordability is at the highest level ever in the 42 years that NAR has been tracking it. Nationally, home prices are down more than 30% from their 2006 peak. Mortgage rates hover near all-time lows, with 30-year fixed loans just under 4%. And while the 10-year Treasury note yields around 2% and a 1-year CD an even stingier 1% or less, housing investments, specifically homes purchased as rental properties, return a 6.3% yield on average, according to Goldman Sachs.

So you have cash or financing to make a purchase, you’re aware of the responsibilities that come with homeownership, and despite the woes continuing to hinder a full-on housing market recovery, you believe in brick and mortar investments. Now comes the tricky part: where to buy that house.

“A lot of what we read is national but you have to take housing down to the local level and look at the reasons why a market may be turning around, may be a good place to buy,” says Steve Berkowitz, chief executive of Realtor.com, a Campbell, Calif.-based home listing site.

To determine the best places to invest in a real estate purchase now, Realtor.com created a list which sorted through February housing and jobs data for 146 Metropolitan Areas and Metropolitan Divisions (cities and their neighboring suburbs) across the U.S. The company, which boasts millions of home listings filtered from over 900 Multiple Listing Services, looked at listing price data, sales data and inventory trends such as the amount of homes available in each market and number of days on market. Realtor.com also utilized the peak-to-trough home price index from Fiserv Case-Shiller, which tracks how much home prices have fallen in the past five years and can serve as an indicator of whether they have bottomed. Lastly, unemployment rates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics were factored into the rankings, since jobs (or lack thereof) are a leading indicator of housing demand.

If you want to buy low, foreclosure-riddled Tucson, Ariz., may be just the place. It ranks No. 1 on this list.

Please visit Yahoo! Real Estate to read the original, full length post provided by Forbes.com.

Tucson is the best market for real estate investors, an online real estate company says. The Old Pueblo, where home prices have tumbled to levels not seen since the early 2000s, topped Realtor.com’s top 10 list of investment towns. Realtor.com tracks data in 146 major metropolitan markets.

Homes in Tucson Selling Faster than a Year Ago

With prices in Tucson having fallen so hard since the burst of the housing bubble and inventory dwindling, investors have grown eager to jump in the market, said Jennifer DuBois, a Realtor.com spokeswoman.

“Foreclosure opportunities seem to be decreasing and people are sensing now’s the time to get in,” DuBois said.

Homes are selling faster in Tucson than they were a year ago, DuBois said. And even though sale prices are lower than they were then, sellers are generally asking for higher prices when they list their property on Realtor.com, DuBois said.

In Tucson, investor activity has picked up over the past year, agrees Justin Bentley, an agent with Tierra Antigua Realty. Bentley, who himself purchases and flips houses, said he’s seen in-state and out-of-state buyers. Even contractors whose business has slowed because of the decline in new-home construction have gotten into the game, he said.

In 2011, nearly 6,400 homes in Pima County were sold for less than $100,000, which is more than 35 percent of the 18,000 homes sold last year, according to an Arizona Daily Star analysis.
Prices that low are ripe for investors with cash on hand who are either looking to fix up a house for a quick sale, rent it out or hold onto it until prices come back.

And while values have dropped and investors are swooping in to pick up deals, the presence of such buyers indicates they have confidence housing prices in Tucson will eventually rebound, Bentley said.

He and some other investors recently purchased a house near East Golf Links and South Kolb roads. The bank-owned property was listed at $37,700, but because competition for foreclosures is increasing, Bentley said he paid $54,000 for it. “I knew we had to be aggressive,” he said.

The house had some fire damage and it took about $30,000 to spruce it up. Now, Bentley said he plans to put the red-brick home on the market for $119,000.

Alan Murdock, another Tierra Antigua agent who’s also an investor, said even though housing prices have dropped significantly, rent prices haven’t plunged as much.

Murdock said he purchased a duplex for $100,000 that a previous buyer paid $290,000 for. By putting a mortgage on that property, he could use the money to purchase other houses, and collect rent to pay down the debt.

Some investors have worried about getting into the market, fearing banks might unleash a backlog of foreclosed properties and further drive down prices.

But so far, that hasn’t happened, Murdock said. Now investors who may have been waiting are starting to get into the market.

“There’s a broader level of buyers that have confidence right now,” Murdock said.

Top 10 Realtor.com’s top investment towns:

1. Tucson
2. Austin, Texas
3. Kansas City, Mo.
4. Baltimore
6. Salt Lake City
7. San Jose, Calif.
8. Raleigh, N.C.
9. Milwaukee
10. St. Louis

Please visit Arizona Daily Star to read the original, full length post.

The Supreme Court appeared sympathetic Monday to an Idaho couple’s fight to build their dream home over the objections of the Environmental Protection Agency, in a case that could have far broader implications and limit the EPA’s ability to regulate developers, energy companies and others.

Supreme Court Skeptical of the EPA’s Position

Justice Samuel Alito said homeowners could relate to the situation of Idahoans Michael and Chantell Sackett.

“Don’t you think most ordinary homeowners would say this kind of thing can’t happen in the United States?” Alito asked the lawyer who was arguing for the government during oral arguments in the case Monday.

Alito called the EPA’s conduct “outrageous.” Justice Antonin Scalia spoke of the agency’s “highhandedness.”

The broad issue is whether landowners hit by EPA compliance orders should be allowed to sue immediately to overturn those orders, rather than waiting for the EPA to go to court to force compliance.

The case could have far-reaching implications. Environmental groups say that a Sackett victory could allow big corporate polluters to tie up the EPA in court instead of dealing with the problem.

The Sackett case has become a conservative rallying cry, with radio hosts, lawmakers and business groups touting it as an example of an agency run amok. Idaho Republican Sen. Mike Crapo said, “This is what happens when an overzealous federal agency would rather force compliance than give any consideration to private property rights, individual rights, basic decency or common sense.”

The legal storm began after the Sacketts filled in dirt and rock on their property for a home they were building on about a half-acre near scenic Priest Lake in northern Idaho.

Officials from the EPA appeared and asked the Sacketts whether they had a permit to fill in wetlands under the Clean Water Act. The EPA subsequently told the Sacketts to “remove all unauthorized fill material” and to plant trees and bushes, saying the couple faced potential fines of up to $37,500 a day if they didn’t fully comply with the directive.

The Sacketts dispute the assertion that the land, which is in a subdivision, is wetlands, and they challenged the EPA’s authority. The conservative Pacific Legal Foundation, which signed on to represent the Sacketts for free, argues that landowners should get to challenge EPA compliance orders in court because otherwise they’re just at the mercy of the threat of big fines.

General Electric, the American Petroleum Institute, the National Association of Home Builders and 10 states filed court briefs in support of the Sacketts, underscoring the potential broad implications of the case.

The EPA says that directives such as the one the Sacketts received are essentially just warnings with the goal of negotiating a solution. The government says a court challenge shouldn’t be allowed until the EPA goes to a judge in an attempt to seek enforcement of the order.

“It is phrased as an order. But the only thing that EPA is authorized to do … is to order people to do what they were already legally required to do. That is, order them to comply with their legal obligations,” Justice Department attorney Malcolm Stewart argued Monday.

A Boise, Idaho-based trial judge, appointed by President George H.W. Bush, and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals have sided with the EPA’s position in the case. So have the nation’s other four appellate circuits, in similar cases.

It’s unusual for the Supreme Court to take up an issue when there’s been such unanimous agreement among the lower courts, leading to speculation that the high court’s conservative majority decided to hear the case because it’s intent on striking a blow to the powers of the EPA.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in the case might not come until June, but it was clear at Monday’s hearing that justices were skeptical of the EPA’s position. Justice Stephen Breyer said he read the order and that it didn’t seem to him like a warning, but a government demand.

The EPA says the Sacketts should have sought a permit and that the couple didn’t consult with the agency or the Army Corps of Engineers before filling the land.

The Sacketts say they had no reason to suspect that their land would be considered wetlands. An environmental group produced documents under the Freedom of Information Act, though, showing that the couple disregarded the opinion of a wetlands expert. Michael Sackett said Monday after the arguments that the man had taken only a cursory look at the property, spending less than half an hour and never digging down into the ground.

Sackett, who called it a “David vs. Goliath” case, said he couldn’t see how his property, 500 feet from Priest Lake in an existing subdivision with a sewer hookup, could be considered wetlands that demanded protection.

Please visit McClatchy Newspapers to read the original, full length post.

Please visit Arizona Daily Star to read about the court’s decision.

Dan Kowalyshyn figures he owes about $200,000 more on his mortgage than what his home in Eastvale, Calif., is worth today. The tile-roofed four-bedroom is across the street from a cul-de-sac where three of the six homes have been lost to foreclosure since his $570,000 purchase in 2006. Kowalyshyn, a software developer, has decided to keep up on his mortgage payments because he sees signs of improvement outside his window. Trucks drive by to deliver lumber for houses being put up by PulteGroup (PHM), KB Home (KBH), and Meritage Homes (MTH). “Either those builders are insane, or they’re getting some traction selling new homes,” Kowalyshyn, 40, says. “I think we’re seeing the beginning of a recovery.”

The Housing Market Lives! Finally. Maybe

After several false starts, housing is flashing the strongest signals yet of a sustainable rebound. Buyers are wading back into the market, spurred by rising employment and record-low mortgage rates. Six years into the biggest real estate collapse since the Great Depression, housing may become a net contributor to the U.S. economy for the first time since 2005. “There are definitely green shoots in the housing market, no argument about that,” says Peter de Bruin, an economist at ABN Amro Group Economics in Amsterdam. He, along with his colleague Maritza Cabezas, is the most accurate forecaster of new-home sales in the two years ended Feb. 1, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. “Housing will contribute modestly to recovery this year, and we will see a sustained recovery in 2013” that probably will continue through 2015, he says.

Existing home sales reached their fastest pace in 20 months in January, and more Americans than forecast signed contracts to buy, according to the National Association of Realtors. Housing starts, including apartments, rose 1.5 percent in January to an annual rate of 699,000, the Commerce Department reported, up from a pace of 689,000 in December. About 750,000 total new housing units—480,000 single-family and 270,000 multifamily—will be started this year, up 23 percent from last year, although still below the 2 million pace in 2004 and 2005, says Paul Dales, an economist with Capital Economics in London. In a sign that demand may be catching up with supply, the inventory of homes listed for sale fell to 6.1 months, down from a peak of 12.1 months in July 2010 and the lowest level since April 2006, when the real estate bubble was nearing its crest, the NAR says.

Early signs of a recovery haven’t revived prices, which have continued to fall as distressed real estate sales depress values. The S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price index of 20 U.S. cities fell 3.9 percent last year to a post-crash low, according to a Feb. 28 report. Short sales, in which owners sell for less than the amount owed, and foreclosures accounted for 35 percent of January transactions, according to the NAR.

Prices “may bob around a bit this year, falling in one quarter and rising in the next,” says Dales. Yet they will be “broadly unchanged,” even if more foreclosed homes come to market following a Feb. 9 settlement between the five largest mortgage servicers and state attorneys general over their methods for repossessing homes. “The bottom is behind us,” he says. “I don’t think we will return to anything like the exceptional booming market we had five years ago. We will have a very steady, slow recovery but a recovery nonetheless.”

The bottom line: With existing homes selling at the fastest pace in 20 months and 750,000 starts expected this year, housing may boost the economy.

Please visit Bloomberg Businessweek to read the original, full length post.

Anyone who follows Robert Shiller closely knows that it’s hard to get him to commit to calling a bottom in the housing market, which continues to see prices fall. “I just don’t see any scientific way to be assured what it’s going to do,” he told CNBC in an interview today. This is coming from the same economist who predicted the housing bubble in the second edition of his book Irrational Exuberance. However, his tone seems to have turned a bit more optimistic.

Robert Shiller Interview with CNBC’s Brian Sullivan

“It could turn around,” Shiller told CNBC’s Brian Sullivan. “We’re seeing some good news now. Starts, permits, confidence, the NAHB housing index is strikingly up. It’s still low, but it’s up.”

CNBC’s Mandy Drury pursued the matter further: “Where is the endgame, Robert?”

“Well, in terms of housing, we might be at the end game,” Shiller responded. “Home prices are back to a normal level. They could just stay here, and that would be all right, right?

“Housing is very affordable, interest rates are down, prices are down to kind of a normal level. They haven’t overshot normal. So maybe in terms of housing, this it it. This is it.”

“Did you just say this may be the bottom?” asked Sullivan.

“It might be, yeah,” answered Shiller. “Things can turn quickly and sharply. It’s too soon to tell.”

So, he’s willing to admit that it might be a bottom. But still, he’s reluctant to commit.

Here’s the video from CNBC.com

Please visit Business Insider to read the original, full length post.

Where are the best places to retire in the U.S.? According to John Brady, founder of TopRetirements.com, the absolute best cities and towns for older Americans have good weather, access to health care, low property taxes, and a certain “wow” factor. Throw in access to adult education, cultural activities, job opportunities for older Americans, low housing costs and income-tax rates, low crime rate, and good walkability and livability — and you get a list of both well-known and lesser-known cities and towns that retirees might fancy.

Tucson Ranked #4!

The University of Arizona has a big presence in Tucson, making this city of more than 500,000 people a great college town, Brady said. Plus, there is the beautiful desert for outdoor recreation and scenery, along with the warmest winters in Arizona (about 50 degrees Fahrenheit on average in January). And home prices, at a median $131,000, are well below the national average. The cost of living in Tucson is 5% less than the national average, according to AreaVibes. And last but not least, there are ample and very sophisticated health-care choices, said Brady. In fact, Austin, Texas, Fort Myers, Fla., and Tucson are the best places for retirees based solely on access to high-quality health care, he said. What’s not so good about Tucson? The crime rate, walkability, and income taxes for seniors are worse than average.

Please visit The Wall Street Journal’s MarketWatch to read the original, full length post.