Before going any further, it is very important to emphasize three key points:
1. Property taxes don’t change until July 2012.
2. Taxes would be calculated based on the “New Property Assessment” in the bottom right of the letter, not the market value.
3. The mill rate will change, so multiplying the current mill rate by the “New Property Assessment” is not a reliable estimate of future taxes.

Although the overall timeline extends through spring and into July, there is immediate action required for West Hartford homeowners who are concerned about the Market Values assigned to their properties.

The Town will be holding informal hearings on proposed market values through most of the month of December. Owners who wish to challenge their value need to call 860-561-7598 by Friday 12/9/2011 between 9:00 and 4:00 in order to schedule a one-on-one appointment.

Once you’re on the schedule, you should gather some market data to support your contention that the market value assigned to your property is too high. There are a couple of primary sources of information. The Assessor’s office has a number of large binders on their public tables in which you can look up sales information. They have also loaded the new market values of all the properties in town into the Vision Database. Finally, real estate agents can also help by gathering data through the MLS.

We have been in contact with the Assessor’s office in an effort to understand the big picture results of the revaluation. Most importantly, we have asked for their rough projections of what the mill rate would be if the current proposed market values held, and if the Town budget remained flat. We have also asked for data that will (hopefully) allow us to run different projections and scenarios of our own.

Until the Assessor’s office comes though with some information, our observations are limited to what we discover by looking at the market values of individual homes through the Vision system.

Most properties that we have reviewed showed a decreasing market value compared to the previous year, which is actually the value of the property according to the 2006 revaluation. Decreasing market values make sense since the market has definitely weakened over the past five years.

Comparing the new market value to the old market value is interesting, but not terribly useful. After the 2006 revaluation the Town decided to phase in the new values, but later froze the phase-in after the second year. The result of this decision is that for many homeowners the new market value is actually higher than the one on which their taxes are currently calculated.

For example, one home in Town was assigned a value of about $280k in the 2006 revaluation. Two years into the phase-in the taxable market value had increased to about $210k – still considerably below fair market. That value got locked in once the phase-in was frozen. Revaluation 2011 has set the value of this home at about $270k, so even though the market value has fallen since 2006, it’s still going to experience a step up in taxable market value. (We know this is confusing, it took us quite a while to understand, and model, the 2006 phase-in. Please feel free to email questions or post them in the comments.)

The revaluation has not treated all homes that sold in 2011 equally. Some properties that sold were assigned their sales price as the market value, which seems quite reasonable. Others were not … we saw one that was assigned a value meaningfully lower than the sales price.

That’s all we have for the moment. Check back in over the coming weeks – we’ll post additional information and analysis as it is available. And West Hartford homeowners, don’t forget to review the proposed market values in the letters you received and decide if you want to challenge your values.

Related Posts
West Hartford Revaluation
West Hartford Revaluation, Part II
Property Taxes and Revaluations

Proposed Fair Market Value

The first important point to make is that the numbers sent by the City have no immediate impact on our property taxes. They are an important milestone in the revaluation process that will show up in our July 2012 tax bills.

The values in the letter are also market values rather than assessed values. So the number you received is the value at which the City believes your home would sell in the open market. The value on which our homes are actually taxed is a much lower number, the assessment, which over the past few years has been less than 30% of the market value assigned in 2006. We do have an opportunity to challenge the new market values, if we feel they are unfair, which will be discussed below.

Over the next few months the City will finalize the market values for all the properties in the City in order to create the 2012 Grand List. Homeowners that do challenge their market values, and are not happy with that outcome, can appeal the initial result to the Board of Assessment Appeals. Please see your letter, and the City website, for more information.

Determining the assessment ratio for the residential property class is the next challenge for the Assessor. The letter notes that it will be established by the end of January, though it will depend on the Grand List, so a final number probably won’t be available until all market value appeals have been completed. Hopefully the January number will be a good estimate based on a mostly complete Grand List. Multiplying our market values by the assessment ratio of residential property will give the assessed value on which we’ll pay our taxes.

In May, the City Council will review the City budget. They will back into the mill rate needed to fund the budget based on the assessed values of all the properties in town. And in July we’ll receive our new tax bills that reflect the results of Revaluation 2011.

Immediate Action

Over the next few weeks the market values are still open for discussion. Homeowners who want to challenge their values, or at least get an explanation, need to set up an appointment. The “informal hearing” appointments are held with the CLT Division of Tyler Technologies, who can be reached weekdays from 8:30 to 4:30 at 877-394-3379. Appointments must be requested by December 15th.

Homeowners choosing to discuss their values are expected to bring data and evidence to support their position. The letter we all received notes that “a change in value will be considered if the owner is able to demonstrate that the appraised value is in excess of market value.”

The primary source of market value data is the sales records that are kept Downtown in City Hall. Specific properties can be researched using the “On-Line Data” link in the right column of the Hartford Assessor page. The Assessor’s office intends to publish the Proposed Fair Market Values of all properties on this site so that owners have an easy way to perform their research.

Real estate agents are another source of market value information. We successfully challenged our market value in 2006, and are happy to help homeowners make a case for the lower valuation.

Initial Observations

We have heard from a number of Hartford homeowners already, and the clear consensus is that assigned market values have fallen from the Revaluation 2006 numbers. That’s to be expected, as the actual market values in the neighborhood have fallen.

Values of the individual homes do seem to deviate from what we feel are their actual values. Some owners have surprisingly low values, while others are a little too high for the current environment.

More interesting is the big picture. Hartford has three assessment buckets that each have their own assessment ratios: residential, apartment, and commercial. The State legislature passed a bill in June that set the assessment ratios for the coming tax year at 50% for apartments and 70% for commercial. The residential assessment rate was capped such that homeowners would be responsible for no more than an additional 3.5% of the tax burden due to the revaluation. At the same time, the assessment ratio for residential has a floor of 23%.

Under the new system, apartment buildings will definitely have higher property taxes. That assessment class was expanded to include 4 family buildings, and the assessment ratio was increased from about 37.6% to 50%. Commercial buildings will continue to be assessed at 70%, but will no longer have an additional surcharge on top of that.

The wildcard in the whole process is how much commercial values fell compared to residential values. That will drive the residential assessment ratio, and play a big role in determining where the mill rate needs to be set in order to fund the budget.

The Courant’s Ken Gosselin published a story over the weekend which noted that the Assessor has not yet analyzed the impact of proposed fair market values on the different property classes. We have been in touch with the Assessor’s office too, asking for both their projections on the residential assessment ratio and likely mill rate. We have also requested the big picture market value data so that we can do our own analysis. Please keep an eye on this site in the coming weeks; we will publish additional information and findings as they are available.

In the meantime, take a second look at the letter you received from the City about your property’s proposed fair market value. If you are concerned that it might be too high, then it is in your best interest to look into the matter further — and we are happy to help if needed.

Related Posts
Overview of Hartford’s Property Tax System

Doing the calculation in my head was a very bad idea. Without actually thinking about it very much, I jumped to the conclusion that the $8,000 was “like a million bucks” in today’s dollars – it just seems like so much money for that long ago. Though, full disclosure, I wasn’t alive 100 years ago, so I don’t have a good sense of how much people earned or how much everyday items cost.

It turns out that adjusting $8,000 for 100 years worth of inflation results in a present day value of less than $190,000. (The government websites only go back to 1913, so I ended up using Tom’s Inflation Calculator – the results were consistent with each other). Far, far less than my initial guess.

Although I find this interesting, and perhaps you do too, it has no impact on the current market value of the home. None what-so-ever. Really, no cost information does.

Buyers don’t care how much the house cost to build 100 years ago. They don’t care about how much that new roof, furnace, or family room addition cost either. And they still wouldn’t care even if all of these projects were done last year.

Sellers are on the receiving end of this kind of logic too. Buyers like to take the current asking price and reduce it by the full cost of the improvements they feel need to be made. If they started with the estimated value of the home once the work was complete it might be more relevant, but they usually don’t.

I just wanted to get that out there – trying to justify a bid or asking price with cost information is an uphill battle. You’re more likely to have success with recent comparable sales and homes that are still available for sale. But even then it can still be a struggle to get buyers and sellers to agree on a price.

Phasing In Market Values
We tried to keep things simple last time, focusing on the basic revaluation process and timeline. This required leaving out an important detail about how the 2006 revaluation was implemented. When the updated Market Values were released in the fall of 2006, residents learned that property values had increased dramatically since the previous revaluation in 1999. Rising property values are usually a good thing for owners, since it increases the equity in their home. However, this time there was a catch.

The revaluation found that residential property increased in value more than commercial property, which meant that homeowners would pay higher taxes as they collectively took over some of the tax burden from commercial property owners. In addition, residential property appreciation varied by house, which meant that homeowners with the largest gains in home value would see an even larger increase in property taxes.

West Hartford decided to use a Phase-In to more gradually transition to the new Market Values. Phase-Ins are relatively common, and increase the taxable market value of a property in stages so that owners with the biggest gains in property value aren’t hit with large tax increases all at once.

The Town allowed taxable values to increase by a maximum of 25% in the first year. Since nearly all homes had appreciated by more than 25%, the remaining change in Market Value was distributed equally to years 2 – 5 of the phase-in. By Grand List 2011, everyone would be taxed based on their 2006 Market Value.

Freezing the Phase-In
Public concern about the revaluation grew over the first two years, and focused on two main points. First, that the October 2006 revaluation date may have been the peak of the market. Some argued that the values were unfair because homes couldn’t be sold at those prices less than two years after they were set. The second concern was that homeowners were being taxed on unrealized gains. Owners didn’t have any extra money in their pockets from their home’s appreciation, so how could they afford to pay their increased taxes without selling their home? The argument typically used long-time residents who were on a fixed income as examples. The Town Council voted to freeze the phase-in after the second year, locking in the Grand List 2007 values.

Many of the effects of freezing the phase-in were correctly identified in real time at public meetings. Residential property had increased in value more than commercial property, so freezing the phase-in shifted more tax burden to businesses, which were struggling with a weakened economy. It also shifted more of the burden to motor vehicle owners. Finally, homes with less than average appreciation ended up paying more taxes than they otherwise would have, while homes with more than average appreciation paid less than they otherwise would have.

In the two years since the freeze was implemented, we’ve learned even more about the effects. One of the most interesting is that the revaluation was not done at the peak of the market. Average prices continued to rise through 2007 even though the number of transactions was already falling. Although we didn’t publish the chart, the trend was similar in West Hartford. Additionally, the decline in prices over the subsequent down years has not been nearly as steep in West Hartford as it has in other areas of the region or the country. The value of many homes continues to be fairly close to the numbers identified in the 2006 revaluation.

As a specific example, consider a very typical 3 bedroom, 1.5 bath home in West Hartford Center. The 1999 revaluation set the Market Value at $148,600. Revaluation 2006 determined that it had appreciated to $280,286. The property had sold a couple years before for about that price, so in this case the Assessor did pretty well.

Revaluation 2011 will likely show that its Market Value has not changed dramatically. This particular home was recently listed for sale again, at right around $300,000, and went under contract very quickly, as most do in this price range. However, because the phase-in was frozen, the home is on the tax roles as being worth $209,384.

Analysis of Grand List data from the Assessor’s office shows that had the Phase-In been completed as planned, the mill rate for the coming year would be about 32.65 rather than 39.44. We calculated this number by removing the Phase-In Exemptions from the assessed values and then allowing the mill rate to decrease until the property tax revenue equaled what the Town expects to raise in the coming year. Our estimated mill rate may not be exactly right, but it’s close.

Planning for the Fall
Owners are in a similar position as 2006 when looking towards the 2011 revaluation. Within the residential side of the Grand List there are large variations in how home prices differ from the frozen phase-in values. Changes to the commercial side of the Grand List, which makes up 16.4% of property values in town, are also uncertain. It is difficult to project how the tax burden may shift. It seems prudent to wait until the fall to understand exactly where we stand before getting too concerned about different possibilities.

In the meantime, residents need to understand a few key points. The revaluation will begin to go public in the fall, and individual home owners will have an opportunity to challenge their Market Values. There will hopefully be a public discussion about how to transition to the new Market Values. Finally, if the Phase-In had been completed (rather than being frozen), the order-of-magnitude tax impact on owners would have been in the +5% to +10% range, though it would have varied considerably based on the assessment of individual homes.

I don’t think they do. Their goal is to make money. Basically all the sites make money by selling advertising to realtors, mortgage lenders, and credit people. They want to generate as many page views and clicks as possible, since that’s what translates into revenue. Buyers are heavy users during their search, but once they get a home under contract they no longer need to keep their preferred site open in the browser tab all day at work.

It comes down to an alignment of incentives. The public websites need to be engaging enough to capture a buyer’s interest, but not so helpful that they find a home immediately and are no longer a user (potential source of revenue). They benefit from extended home searches.

There are a few different ways that sites disrupt the search process, whether it’s intentional or unintentional:

Data Lag: Listing information is updated on different schedules for different sites. In all honesty, this could be related to how the different MLS systems (realtors) around the country make their data available. All I know is that some sites are faster than others.

Not Clearly Marking Homes Under Contract: We get a lot of calls about listings people see online that are already sold. They’re not closed yet, but the seller has already accepted a bid from a buyer. Getting distracted, or even emotionally hijacked, by a property that’s not really available causes buyers to miss out on legitimate opportunities.

Suspect Valuation Estimates: One site in particular touts their ability to value any property in the Country. Our experience is that buyers who take these valuations too seriously are unable to make realistic bids and have trouble buying a home. The estimates are inevitably too low, and the buyer isn’t going to “overpay,” so they keep lowballing sellers and never get a home.

Distressed Properties: Introducing distressed properties into the mix makes buyers more uncertain. Some try to use foreclosure pricing to support bids on non-distressed properties, which is generally not effective in this area. Others decide they want to pursue a foreclosure, not realizing that the process can be very different and it may take months to get a response.

Despite these concerns about the public real estate sites, I think they’re entertaining and provide a valuable service. They each have their own angle, and generally do a nice job presenting their data. As long as home buyers recognize the motivations and potential weaknesses of each site, they should definitely feel comfortable using the one they like best.

In the comments of yesterday’s post, Michael suggested that the realtors offer the general public the opportunity to subscribe to the actual MLS. It’s an interesting idea, and could be a way to reduce the (modest) annual fees that agents pay to support the existing system. I wonder if the local board has considered that possibility? Anyone from GHAR reading today? In some ways the realtor.com site is just that … the data is updated very frequently and comes directly from the MLS. However, it’s also like all the other sites in that there are ads and attempts to collect contact information.

Even this site has an agenda, though our incentives are much more aligned with our clients. We only benefit when someone successfully completes their transaction … so hopefully the GHREB can still be your friend.

We’re sensing some confusion over the future direction of property taxes among some of our buyer clients and homeowner friends. We don’t know pretend to know exactly what will happen, but have a theory we thought we should share:

You’ll notice that property values (assessments) do not figure into the property tax calculation. Even though your home, or the home you hope to buy, may have fallen in value since the last revaluation, you should not expect that to automatically translate into lower property taxes in the future.

The manner in which property taxes are calculated can be confusing to people, and revaluations add an extra level of complication. Back in the day, when home values only went up, revaluations were met with a combination of excitement and fear. Excitement since someone would be giving us an estimate of how much equity we had earned by owning a home in a rising market. But also fear because, “If my home actually doubled in value, and the mill rate stays the same, then my taxes are going to double!”

Although that statement it true, the mill rate will adjust any time there is a major change in the Grand List (the total value of all property). Every time there was a major increase in a town’s Grand List during a revaluation, the mill rate would decrease to keep the actual taxes paid roughly in line with previous years. Here’s a good example, the history of the mill rate in Newington. You can see that the mill rate actually falls most years in which there is a revaluation.

The goal of a revaluation is distribute the tax burden fairly across property owners. Properties in a town gain and lose value differently, so the state requires that towns catch up with those changes every five years. The only way a revaluation will make a meaningful impact on your individual taxes is if your property’s value changes in a dramatically different manner than the average property in town.

These days it’s difficult to know if a home has increased or decreased in value since the last revaluation – it depends on home price trends and the revaluation schedule in the specific town. But suppose there is a town where the prices have fallen 10% across the board since the last revaluation. Homeowners there should expect to see their individual assessments fall, but are also likely to see the mill rate jump.

At the end of the day, the town budget determines how much must be raised in property taxes. If the town budget is flat, then next year will be the same total tax as this year. The mill rate will be set to ensure that the appropriate amount of money is collected. Decreasing property values, unfortunately, have nothing to do with the level of municipal spending, which is what actually determines our property taxes.

Environment
The overall real estate environment can be charitably described as unfavorable over the past few years. It’s been characterized by falling prices, decreasing sales volume, and tightening credit as the overall economy works through a financial downturn. Buyers have been far more reluctant to make a big real estate purchase despite the Federal stimulus and the very low mortgage rates. Part of it is undoubtedly less confidence in their personal financial security, the concern that they could be laid off tomorrow. At the same time people no longer believe that real estate prices will always increase, so they’re less interested in sweating out the first few years of big mortgage payments in hopes of being rewarded with quick appreciation and home equity.

Our research shows that the number of single-family home sales in Hartford County peaked in 2005 at just over 9,000 properties. Sales quickly fell to the lower 6,000s by 2008, and remained about there in 2009 before falling to the upper 5,000s for 2010. Single-family home prices didn’t peak until 2007, fell 14% in two years, and then rebounded a bit in 2010. It’s still not clear to us why the average home price increased this year, though it’s encouraging that they didn’t fall further. Our current theory is that the mix of sales changed to included more larger (higher priced) homes.

Looking Forward
We don’t see any major changes in the big picture story, so we expect 2011 will bring more of the same. Local employers seem relatively stable in that there have not been major layoff announcements recently, but lots of people are still looking for work. And thrift continues to be a virtue, so the rank and file are less likely to reach for a larger home. We think the number of deals will remain in the vicinity of 6,000 for the year, and that prices will be flat-to-down for the region overall. We expect mortgage rates to continue to slowly rise, though not jump so much that buyers feel their purchasing power has been taken away. Basically, we expect that it will be another year in which homes have to be priced and marketed well in order to sell.

That said, we have some disagreement about the specifics. Rather than settle it internally, we thought it would be more fun to have a public airing of differences, so that bragging rights can be established at the end of the year.

Number of Transactions
One of the largest differences in the market between then and now is the number of transactions. Neither of us believe that they will return to previous levels, but we do have a bit of disagreement over the direction they’re heading.

• Amy: Sales volume is going to stay flat or go down versus 2010 for Hartford County … it’s going to get worse.
• Kyle: Sales volume is going to stay flat or go up slightly versus 2010 for Hartford County … we’re stabilized and rebounding.

Mortgage Rates
The Federal Reserve’s current Quantitative Easing program is clearly not holding mortgage rates down. So how high will they go in the coming year?

• Amy: Interest rates will fluctuate between 5% and 6.5% during the year. The slow increase will cause some buyers to pull the trigger sooner than they had otherwise planned.
• Kyle: Interest rates will increase, though it’s not clear to me how high they’ll go. As long as inflation fears don’t take off, they should remain low enough for people to actually get mortgages.

Bonus Predictions

• Amy: Short sales are going to be a lot more common. I am not a fan of short sales because my buyers wait and wait for months to hear back from the bank, never do, and eventually move on out of frustration.
• Kyle: The requirement that all condo associations update their FHA approval will cause delays for buyers. Condo associations are run by volunteers. Ideally their management companies, professional property managers, will make sure the associations understand the benefit of being FHA approved, but I’m sure there will be some complexes out there that just forget to go through the process.
• Kyle: This year there is no obvious real estate storyline, like there has been for the past few with the Federal Home Buyer Tax Credit. But as an industry, selling is easier when there is either a big carrot or a big stick out there, so I have no doubt one will be manufactured. I’m thinking that after a couple years of credit carrot, we’re going to be transitioning to the stick this year. Two leading candidates are “Buy now before prices start to rise” and/or “Buy now before mortgage rates rise.”

We’ll see what happens … it’ll be an interesting year in Greater Hartford real estate!

Readers, do you have any predictions? Related to real estate or in general?

A critical point in the overall thesis, and therefore a focal point of the article, is the example of a dilapidated property that actually hurts the value of neighboring homes. Unfortunately, a very poor example was selected. As agents familiar with the property and the neighborhood in question, we feel the example actually works against the overall angle of the story.

The author quoted a real estate agent about a bank owned home in Hartford’s West End. The agent asserts that the home “significantly and negatively impacts a West End homeowner’s ability to sell.” As evidence, the agent “points to 13 properties in the West End neighborhood listed above $300,000 that have been removed from the market or have had contracts expire since January 2009.”

We have a number of concerns about three short paragraphs in an otherwise well-done article.

We don’t believe that the highlighted property’s exterior appearance rises to the level of “eyesore.” Although the assertion that the “landscaping has not been maintained” is factually correct, the lot is very different than the yards with long grass discussed elsewhere in the article. This property is set quite close to the street for a larger home and has far more plantings than grassy areas in the front yard. Most of the landscaping is hidden behind a brick wall, meaning that it is not visible from the street. Is there neglect? Sure, but the home isn’t sitting in what looks like a hay field. And as a brick building with a slate roof, the neglect has had relatively little impact on the overall exterior appearance.

We don’t believe that the highlighted property has scared off buyers. The house in question is on a short street that constitutes its own little neighborhood with only 18 homes. Three of the homes sold this year, so clearly those buyers were not deterred. One could argue that the bank-owned home pushed the price down on the other homes on the street. However, our experience as active agents in the neighborhood is that prices have fallen equally for all homes in that price range, even those without nearby distress. After little activity in 2009, there has been a much more interest in high-end homes in the West End during 2010.

The assertion that 13 homes priced above $300,000 have come off the market without selling is inaccurate and misleading. The inaccurate portion of the statement is that the correct number is 13. In fact, there have been more than 13 single-family homes priced above $300,000 that have not sold. The number increases when multi-family properties and condominiums are also considered. The misleading portion of the statement is the implications that these failed sales are related to vacant homes. Some of the sellers received offers that they chose not to accept. Others changed their minds about moving because of their personal or professional situations. Still others were simply unrealistic about the value of their home. We cannot think of a single West End property that was unsellable due to a poorly maintained neighboring property. Yet we can think of multiple examples of homes that sold despite the neighboring home needing significant maintenance.

It’s unfortunate that the author did not confirm these West End facts with an agent active in the neighborhood. Especially since there are plenty of agents with West End experience that would be happy to contribute to an article. The last time we counted, there were 18 real estate agents that lived in the (small) neighborhood, many of whom are very successful and are regularly quoted in the Courant. There are also plenty of agents who do multiple deals a year in the West End though they live in other areas.

We felt the need to speak out because the article makes the West End the face of neglected properties. Although it’s true that home values have fallen in the West End, and properties have come off the market without selling, these things have been happening elsewhere in Greater Hartford too. Since real estate values fall for a variety of reasons, suggesting that one bank-owned home is causing buyers to avoid the entire neighborhood (the 13 listings removed from the market) is overly simplistic. It may tie the story together, but it’s just not true.

Similarly, one poorly researched section does not negate all the value of this interesting article. We would definitely recommend reading it – just take the portion about the West End property with a grain of salt.

Single-Family Homes
Third quarter sales of single-family homes fell 32.5% compared to the year-earlier period. The total number of 1,314 transactions is the lowest tally for a third quarter since the CTMLS began tracking data in 2000.

The median price for single-family homes in the County increased by 4.3% from $232,000 to $242,000. Sales price per square foot moved in the opposite direction, falling 2.9% from $147/sqft to $143/sqft. Finally, the median time on market increased from 37 days to 47 days.

Condominiums
Hartford County condominiums once again trended in the same directions as the single-family homes during the quarter. The number of sales was down 39.0% over the third quarter last year, with the 368 total transactions also the lowest on record for the quarter.

The median sales price rose 2.9% during the quarter, from $170,000 to $175,000, and the median price per square foot fell from $137/sqft to $134/sqft. In contrast to Single-Families, condominiums experienced a decrease in median days on market from 57 to 53 days.

Changing Sales Mix After Credit Impacts Statistics
The Home Buyer Tax Credit pulled a disproportionate number of lower priced sales into the second quarter of the year versus higher priced sales. As a result of the changing property mix, the median sales price for the County increased at the same time that the median price per square foot suggests that home values were falling.

Single-Family Homes
Second quarter sales of single-family homes increased 23.8% compared to the year-earlier period. Although the total number of 2,047 sales improves on the results for the quarter in both 2008 and 2009, second quarter activity still trailed all of the years between 2000 and 2007 for which the CTMLS has data.

The median price for single-family homes in the County increased by 1.3% from $227,000 to $230,000. Sales price per square foot, another valuation metric, remained virtually unchanged at $147/sqft. Finally, the median time on market decreased from 40 days to 31 days.

Condominiums
Hartford County condominiums trended in the same directions as the single-family homes during the quarter. The number of sales was up 43.8% over the second quarter last year, with the 644 total sales running ahead of 2008 — 2009 and behind 2000 — 2007.

The median sales price rose 3.0% during the quarter, from $165,000 to $169,900, and the median price per square foot held steady at $134/sqft. Condominiums also experienced a decrease in sales time, with the median days on market falling from 51 to 45 days.

Residential Real Estate is More Than the Tax Credit
Local residential real estate markets continued to function even after buyers could no longer claim the Federal Tax Credit. As expected, there was a dramatic lull in the number of contracts written in May and June, which should be visible in the number of third quarter closings. However, buyers still made offers even after the credit expired.