EPA Loses Court Battle, Supreme Court Sides with Land Owners.

Till now the EPA had the authority to levy extreme fines. Based on court documents, when the EPA prevails against any person who has been issued a compliance order but has failed to comply, that amount is increased to $75,000—up to$37,500 for the statutory violation and up to an additional $37,500 for violating the compliance order. Land owners were required to pay the stiff fines and had no avenue in which to challenge an EPA ruling.



In northern Idaho couple decided to take the EP to court. The case labeled Sackett v. EPA involved the building of a property located on Priest Lake but the EPA had labeled the area a wetland and informed the Sackett's that any disturbance or building on the land would result in stiff fines. The EPA had rules that the Spackett's at times had discharged fill material into wetlands at the site filling approximately one half acre. By causing such fill material to enter waters the Sacketts have engaged, and are continuing to engage, in the ‘discharge of pollutants’. The discharge of pollutants without a permit constituted a violation of section 301 of the Clean Water Act.

The had couple hired several engineers to analyze the land and produced data that disputed the EPA's findings. The Sacketts, who do not believe that their property is subject to the Act, asked the EPA for a hearing, but that request was denied. During an interview last fall Mrs. Sackett reported this conversation she had with the EPA; 'So, why would I stop building my house?' The EPA response? 'Because we told you to.'"

The couple decided to take the EPA to District Court and eventually it was appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. The ultimate ruling was unanimous (9-0) in favor of the Sackett's.

Justice Alito responded in brief by saying,

The reach of the Clean Water Act is notoriously unclear.Any piece of land that is wet at least part of the year is in danger of being classified by EPA employees as wetlands covered by the Act, and according to the Federal Government, if property owners begin to construct a home on alot that the agency thinks possesses the requisite wetness, the property owners are at the agency’s mercy. The EPA may issue a compliance order demanding that the owners cease construction, engage in expensive remedial measures, and abandon any use of the property. If the owners do not do the EPA’s bidding, they may be fined upto $75,000 per day ($37,500 for violating the Act andanother $37,500 for violating the compliance order). And if the owners want their day in court to show that their lot does not include covered wetlands, well, as a practical matter, that is just too bad. Until the EPA sues them, they are blocked from access to the courts, and the EPA may wait as long as it wants before deciding to sue. By that time, the potential fines may easily have reached the millions. In a nation that values due process, not to mention private property, such treatment is unthinkable.

We applaud th Supreme Court for taking the correct course of action and limiting the EPA's powers!

Has the Economy Caused Property Tax Revenue to Fall?

Most home owners, including activists that consistently promote increases in government spending, desire to have their home values consistent with the current housing market. (Ironic in a way.) Knowing you are paying more in taxes when rates are based on decreasing home values is something most individuals despise. While there has been a reduction in tax revenue due to reduced spending the local governments have yet to strongly lower owner's assessed values.



A new study from USA Today shows that property tax collection has increased even while the economy tanked. However, for the first time since 1995 collection rates for 2011 were below the rate of inflation. Many local governments are just now starting to review property values. Most local governments created laws preventing assessments of the same home over a short time period thereby preventing drastic increases in property taxes. Well, these rules also apply when property values decrease as they did the past several years.

Based on the USA Today report the property tax collections last year rose 1.2% but actually declined 0.9% when adjusted for inflation. Property taxes generated $436 billion which is about $66 billion more than in 2006 when home values peaked.

Realtors are a great source of information regarding true property value. The only way to have a home value reduced is through a Comparative Market Analysis (CMA). Many Realtors will help fight by providing actual CMA's when confronting the local government. Providing a Zillow Zestimate to a government official will only have them laughing. Hiring an appraiser is an option but even then they are not always the most reliable.

For more on the study head over to USA Today.

Jobless Claims Hits 4-Year Low, Fed's Business Index Highest Level Since June 2010

The unemployment rate held steady for February at 8.5% despite increased jobs numbers as reported last week.  This was caused by more individuals coming back into the labor market seeking jobs.  The U6 unemployment rate (which includes people who stopped searching for employment) actually dropped.

State Unemployment Claims

"This suggests that the recovery is firmly on track," said Scott Brown, chief economist at Raymond James in St. Petersburg, Florida.

The consumer price index increased 0.4% last month driven by increased fuel prices. Food prices actually dropped for the third straight month.

For more details on the data click here.

Guest Article from NewHomes.move.com - Retrofit Your Home

Homes In Sugar Land (Country Club Lifestyle Realty) has teamed up with www.NewHomes.move.com the official website for the National Association of Home Builders to bring even more exciting and relevant content to our Real Estate Blog! Not only do we feature National and Local News, Housing Statistics, Local Community Information, Charity Events and our very own housing studies, but we can now bring connections and advice from Home Builders! So, please welcome Andrew Hill as our very first guest blogger!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With all the hype about going green, you may just think it’s an expensive that just saves a couple of trees. But what if going green didn’t have to cost a fortune? What if going green meant you could actually save money? At first, this may sound like an outlandish idea. After all, when I hear the words “green home” I often mistakenly picture a strangely shaped “house” made out of organic tea-leaves and recycled aluminum cans. But going green isn’t a strange space-age concept and better yet, retrofitting your home can create significant savings.



To retrofit your home, the first thing you should consider is having an energy audit. These experts will look at every aspect of your house and tell you where your energy savings can be improved. If you’re serious about going green, having an energy audit is a very important step. For those of you that aren’t quite ready to dive in, we have other suggestions for how you too can go green (and save some green while you’re at it.)

The two most sensible and easiest ways to retrofit a home are programming the thermostat and switching the light bulbs. Every family has a different threshold for temperature, so we won’t dictate the required settings. It’s up to you to decide what’s comfortable, but make sure to utilize other means of heating and cooling, such as putting on a sweater or using a fan. By programming your thermostat to be less stringent with the temperature while you are at work or asleep, you can significantly reduce your energy expenditures. Likewise, switching from incandescent to CFLs can potentially save you hundreds of dollars over the lifetime of the bulbs. CFLs not only reduce heat production and energy usage, but they also last much longer than incandescent bulbs.



Another simple way to retrofit your home is to plant trees. Trees? Yes. Planting trees that are native to your region can help save your air conditioning bill by providing shade and can even act as a wind blocker to protect your home on those drafty nights.

As you can see, going green doesn’t have to be a strange or even expensive. There are hundreds of other ways to go green, including switching to energy efficient appliances, using low-flow faucet heads, and caulking all of those leaky areas around your door. And if you’re thinking about buying, selling, or investing in real estate, green retrofits are a great way to boost the value of your home. So the next time you consider the cost of going green, think about what you could save by making the switch!

Andrew Hill

ahill@thebdx.com

Senate Legislation Requires Lenders to Speed Up Short Sale Process

Short Sales only impact the credit record for three years while foreclosures last seven years. Thus, many people under water on their mortgages have sought this route to sell their homes. However, lenders are extremely slow and have no strong desire to accept the loss. They hope that over time the home owner will obtain additional finances to continue payment.

Three senators are now banding together to require lenders to speed up the short sale process. The legislation, also known as the Prompt Notification of Short Sale Act, will require a written response from a lender no later than 75 days after receipt of the written request from the buyer. The bill will also allow the buyer to be awarded $1000, plus “reasonable” attorney fees if the Act is violated.

For more head over to DSNEWS