<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/atom.xsl" media="screen"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en"><title type="html">MND NewsWire</title><subtitle type="html">MND NewsWire : Housing and Economic News</subtitle><id>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/news/atom.aspx</id><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/news/" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/news/atom.aspx" /><generator uri="http://communityserver.org" version="4.0.31106.96">Community Server</generator><updated>2012-02-06T13:26:00Z</updated><entry><title>HUD Ready with FY2013 Budget</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02132012_hud_programs_budget.asp" /><id>/02132012_hud_programs_budget.asp</id><published>2012-02-13T22:14:37Z</published><updated>2012-02-13T22:14:37Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;The Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) unveiled its 2013 budget proposal today, asking Congress for
about $44 billion.&amp;nbsp; The amount is roughly
the same as the amount Congress authorized for the 2012 budget year.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In addition, HUD is asking for authority
to guarantee $400 billion in mortgages through FHA's Mutual Mortgage Insurance
Fund which is expected to provide 1.2 million single family mortgages, $149
billion in loan volume, during the year and $500 billion in Ginnie Mae
guarantee authority in order to help finance a wide array of government-insured
products.&amp;nbsp; In addition it requests $25 billion
in loan guarantee authority for the General and Special Risk Insurance Panel
which will provide an estimated 156,000 units in multifamily housing properties
and 80,600 beds in health care facilities.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src="/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/2102_2E00_/HUDBudget_2D00_2.png" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Approximately 75 percent of HUD's budget
goes to rental assistance including both tenant and project based
assistance.&amp;nbsp; Among the tenant based program
(TBA) funds requested for the year are:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul class="unIndentedList"&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;i&gt;$&lt;/i&gt;17.238
billion for the renewal of existing Section 8 vouchers, providing
affordable housing for more than 2.2 million families in need, including the
renewal of special purpose vouchers funded in previous years;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$1.575 billion for administrative fees associated with
operating TBA. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$111
million for Mainstream Section 811 vouchers to enable persons with
disabilities access to affordable, private housing of their choice, and
accommodate the provision of supportive services;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$75 million in Tenant Protection vouchers, which
are provided to tenants to replace either public housing that is demolished or
sold or projects
assisted by Multifamily Housing programs that stop receiving federal subsidies;
and&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$75 million for the HUD-Department of Veterans
Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) vouchers to assist an estimated 10,000
homeless veterans.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Project-based assistance provides
funds to state and local Public Housing Authorities to supplement rents and
maintain the properties.&amp;nbsp; HUD is
requesting $6.59 billion to operate public housing programs and modernize its
aging structures.&amp;nbsp; This request includes:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul class="unIndentedList"&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$4.524 billion in Public Housing Operating Funds to
fund
more than 3,100 public housing authorities to operate and manage approximately
1.2 million units of publicly owned affordable rental housing units, and&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$2.07 billion in Public Housing Capital Funds, primarily to
address capital repair and replacement needs.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;HUD's Project-Based Rental
Assistance (PBRA) program provides rental assistance funding to privately owned
multifamily rental housing projects. &amp;nbsp;The
amount of PBRA funding paid to each owner is generally the difference between
what a household can afford (up to 30 percent of income) and the HUD-approved
rent for the unit.&amp;nbsp; For FY 2013, HUD is
requesting a total $8.7 billion in funding for PBRA programs which includes:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul class="unIndentedList"&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$8.44 billion for the renewal and amendment
of existing PBRA contracts; and &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$260 million for Project-Based Contract
Administrators to
effectively administer the PBRA program.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Another
budget item is over $7 billion to fund capital grants toward local housing and
community development initiatives. These include: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul class="unIndentedList"&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$9.95 billion for Community Development Block
Grants;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$2.07 billion for modernization capital grants,
administrative receiverships and financial and physical assessment support
through Public Housing Capital funds.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$150 million for the Choice Neighborhood initiative;
and&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
$60 million for Indian Community Development Block
Grants.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Approximately
five percent of the HUD budget goes to various initiatives including remediation
of lead based paint hazards, housing counseling, fair housing and equal
opportunity, family self-sufficiency counselors, and research and data
collection.&amp;nbsp; This year HUD is requesting
a total of $2.1 billion for these initiatives.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In
presenting the budget, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan said that it includes
several proposals to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of department
programs. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul class="unIndentedList"&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
It merges its Public Housing Operating and Capital
Funds programs into a single subsidy stream.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Outlines a proposal to streamline and enhance the
Family Self-Sufficiency program,&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
.Includes a series of reforms to rental assistance
programs that save over $500 million without reducing the number of families
served; &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Donovan said that while the
budget is holding the line on increased expenditures, it:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul class="unIndentedList"&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Maintains
housing assistance for all families currently receiving rental subsidies;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Serves
almost 2.5 million families living in public housing and project-based Section
8 developments over 60 percent of whom are elderly and disables;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Supports
tenant-based vouchers for more than 2.2 million families over $45 percent of
whom are elderly and disabled;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Provides
10,000 new vouchers to homeless and funds 5,300 more in supportive housing;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Enables
FHA and Ginnie Mae to continue their crucial, temporary countercyclical roles;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Brings
private capital back to the market through FHA premium increases and other
measures; &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Assists
nearly 5.5 million households, an increase of 82,000 over fiscal year 2011;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Creates
or retains 423,000 jobs directly and 360,000 more indirectly.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src="../../cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/2102_2E00_/HUDBudget.png" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02132012_hud_programs_budget.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/247246/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=247246" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>AMI Takes Position against Mortgage Servicing Settlement</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02132012_mortgage_serving_settlement.asp" /><id>/02132012_mortgage_serving_settlement.asp</id><published>2012-02-13T17:42:16Z</published><updated>2012-02-13T17:42:16Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;In a strongly worded statement on behalf of the &lt;b&gt;American
Association of Mortgage Investors&lt;/b&gt; (AMI), Jonathan Lieberman, Managing Director
of Angelo, Gordon &amp;amp; Company, criticized the recent settlement agreement
over alleged mortgage servicing and foreclosure processing abuses.&amp;nbsp; Lieberman, told the Association's bondholders
in a conference call that the settlement, reached last week between five major
banks and their servicing subsidiaries, the Departments of Justice and Health
Education and Welfare, and 49 of the 50 states' attorneys general that, "Current
press reports tell a story of regulators imposing penalties not only on the bad
actors but also on Americans' investors, pension funds, and retirees," and that
"the rush to finalize a flawed and opaque settlement smells funny.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Members of AMI, he said, have neither direct control of
servicing nor direct contact with mortgage borrowers; rather have suffered
material losses due to the bad acts of mortgage servicers.&amp;nbsp; He compared the current climate to the time
period of 2007 and 2008 "during which our government and regulators picked winners
and losers among domestic banks, broker dealers, foreign banks, insurance companies,
and auto manufacturers; mortgage investors are confronted by like-minded
governmental behavior." &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lieberman said that winners from the settlement, which will
cost the banks between $25 and $40 billion dollars, are "potentially
&lt;b&gt;irresponsible borrowers&lt;/b&gt;, self-servicing, poorly managed and unprincipled banks
and servicers, rating agencies with no alignment of interest with investors,
situational regulators and select members of the political class."&amp;nbsp; The losers are "Responsible Americans -
especially prudent conservative investors, borrowers and savers. Investors'
returns will probably suffer, private capital will continue to shy away from
mortgage lending and long term the cost of capital will escalate for
responsible borrowers.&amp;nbsp; All Americans are
ultimately the BIG (emphasis is Lieberman's) losers."&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lieberman said he sees no penalty, just continued erosion of
responsibility, community standards of care, moral values and fiduciary
standards.&amp;nbsp; "At its root, credit is a
privilege, not a right and not democratically allocated.&amp;nbsp; You earn credit which allows you to borrow
tomorrow's money to pay for something you get today."&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;With the background of the $350 billion in cumulative losses
experienced by investors since 2007, the 1 million loan modifications that have
helped homeowners remain in their homes, and the 2.5 million mortgages that are
delinquent today there are a number of issues that investment managers in the
mortgage sector need to ask.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul class="unIndentedList"&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Can firms effectively assess, protect, and
control investor capital?&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Do American standards of fair play and rule of
law apply to mortgages investments?&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Why are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac excluded from
the settlement? Were the banks following
the GSE guidelines, using their law and document preparation firms and didn't
the GSEs have the unilateral right to terminate and move servicing?&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Why were investors not included in the servicing
negations nor protected during the settlement?&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Have government officials decided that investors
will be the losers in the fight among borrower, banks, and investors.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lieberman concluded his statements by saying Association
members stand ready to provide information and support to government officials
and regulators and borrowers who have been abused by servicers and "stand ready
to support the write down of underwater second lien mortgages."&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02132012_mortgage_serving_settlement.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/247199/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=247199" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Bernanke Speaks to Home Builders on Housing's Role in Recovery</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02102012_bernanke_housing_recovery.asp" /><id>/02102012_bernanke_housing_recovery.asp</id><published>2012-02-10T20:12:19Z</published><updated>2012-02-10T20:12:19Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;Federal Reserve Bank Chairman&lt;b&gt; Ben S.
Bernanke&lt;/b&gt;, speaking to the National Association of Home Builders, said that the
&lt;b&gt;typical post-recession behavior of the housing market&lt;/b&gt;, resurging to help fuel
reemployment and rising incomes, has not played out this time and housing remains
a key impediment to a recovery.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The chairman reviewed the current state
of the housing market, telling the builders of a major imbalance between supply
and demand with 1-2/4 million homes currently unoccupied and for sale and 2
million more in the foreclosure process. &amp;nbsp;At the same time, factors are constraining
demand such as a decline in household formation, high unemployment and
uncertain job prospects, and wariness about home ownership as an investment.&amp;nbsp; The availability of credit is another
constraint.&amp;nbsp; This imbalance has been
reflected in a drop in home prices of historic proportions.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In contrast, he said, rental markets
have strengthened somewhat; vacancy rates have declined, rents have increased,
and the construction of apartment buildings has picked up.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Home builders pay close attention to
these issues, Bernanke said, but the problems in housing have important
implications outside the construction industry. &amp;nbsp;Foreclosures diminish the value of nearby
properties and can directly affect the quality of life in a neighborhood by leading
to increases in vandalism or crime.&amp;nbsp; Declining
neighborhoods depress the tax base leading to cutbacks in services and thus a
vicious circle which putts neighborhood stabilization further out of reach.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &lt;b&gt;decline in home prices&lt;/b&gt; and
consequent loss of owner equity has reduced the ability and &lt;b&gt;willingness of households
to spend&lt;/b&gt;.&amp;nbsp; There are estimates that
homeowners spend between $3 and $5 less for every $100 of housing value they
lose which means the loss of housing wealth may have an impact on the economy
of $200 to $375 billion in consumer spending per year.&amp;nbsp; Low or negative equity also means homeowners
cannot tap equity to pay for emergencies or college tuition, sell their homes
to move to better job markets, or take advantage of low interest rates by refinancing.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Returning
to the subject of &lt;b&gt;mortgage credit&lt;/b&gt;, Bernanke said home mortgage credit has
contracted about 13 percent since its peak in 2007.&amp;nbsp; "In
prior recoveries," he said, "mortgage credit had begun to grow four years after
the business cycle peak--but not this time around."&amp;nbsp; Much of this is a reaction by lenders to the
fallout from earlier lax standards, but current practices may be limiting or
preventing lending even to creditworthy households.&amp;nbsp; Some lenders are reluctant to loan even to
borrowers who could meet the underwriting standards of the government-sponsored
enterprises (GSEs).&amp;nbsp; "Indeed, fewer than
half of lenders are offering mortgages to borrowers with a FICO score of 620
and a down payment of 10 percent, even though such loans could be within the
GSE purchase parameters."&lt;a name="f10"&gt; &lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Bernanke said this may be because of the
difficulty of obtaining private mortgage insurance or a concern on the part of
lenders about representations and warranties.&amp;nbsp;
Another reason for tight lending is that private label mortgage
securitizations have virtually disappeared which may have discouraged lenders from
originating loans that don't exactly fit GSE or FHA criteria.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Tight credit has disproportionately
affected lending to first-time homebuyers which has dropped dramatically.&amp;nbsp; Younger households are taking out mortgages
at lower rates than 10 years ago, well before prices began their run-up.&amp;nbsp; First-time buyers are an important source of
incremental housing demand so this affects house prices and construction and may
also prevent existing homeowners from buying up.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Tight money has implications for
monetary policy as well and Federal Reserve actions to put downward pressure on
&lt;a href="/mbs/"&gt;longer term rates&lt;/a&gt; and to improve financial conditions have had less effect on
both the housing sector and overall economic activity than they otherwise would
have.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Policymakers have been focusing on
refinancing borrowers, loan modifications, and other ways to prevent more foreclosures
which is important but not all foreclosures can be prevented and there has been
increased focus on reducing the overhang of empty and foreclosed homes.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bernanke said with home prices
falling and rents rising, it could make sense in some markets to &lt;b&gt;turn
foreclosed homes into rental properties&lt;/b&gt;.&amp;nbsp;
The Federal Reserve calculates that most REO properties in metropolitan
areas are in neighborhoods with median house values and incomes similar to
those in the area as a whole and tend to commutable to where jobs are.&amp;nbsp; A financial comparison of annual cash flows
from renting properties to discounted sales of REO suggests that some lenders
might come out ahead renting rather than selling some of their properties. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In addition, keeping paying tenants
in home, including leasing to former owners could be the best way to maintain
property values and the quality of neighborhoods and appropriately structured
REO-to-rental programs could help some involuntary renters become owners again.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Such rental programs have
&lt;b&gt;drawbacks&lt;/b&gt;.&amp;nbsp; Bulk selling to investors can
present financing problems, some properties are in too poor condition to be
attractive, and it may be difficult to put together sufficiently large clusters
of properties to allow for economies of scale in their management but Bernanke
pointed to a number of cities where appropriate conditions exist.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Land banks are another option for foreclosed
houses with low value or in poor condition.&amp;nbsp;
Land banks have the ability to purchase and sell real estate, clear
titles, accept donated properties, rehabilitate properties for resale or rental
or even demolish the structure.&amp;nbsp; Not all
states have passed legislation to permit land banks and most existing ones lack
the resources to keep pace with the number of low value properties in the
current market.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bernanke concluded by saying that we
need to continue to develop and implement policies that will help housing get
back on its feet.&amp;nbsp; Sustained efforts to
address the many interlocking factors hold the market back will pay dividends
in the long run.&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02102012_bernanke_housing_recovery.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/247123/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=247123" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>FHA Claims Against Bank of America / Countrywide Resolved</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02092012_countrywide_mortgage_fraud.asp" /><id>/02092012_countrywide_mortgage_fraud.asp</id><published>2012-02-09T19:42:18Z</published><updated>2012-02-09T19:42:18Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;Loretta E. Lynch, U.S. Attorney for
the Eastern District of New York announced the settlement of claims her office
had brought against Bank of America, Countrywide Financial Corporations and
some of its affiliates for underwriting and origination mortgage fraud.&amp;nbsp; The &lt;b&gt;settlement ends an inquiry&lt;/b&gt; into whether
Countrywide, acquired by Bank of Boston in 2008, had knowingly made loans insured
by FHA to unqualified home buyers.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The
settlement, in the amount of &lt;b&gt;$1 billion&lt;/b&gt; requires an immediate payment of $500
million to correct some of the harm done to FHA by Countrywide's conduct.&amp;nbsp; The remaining $500 million will be deferred
to fund a loan modification program for borrowers across the nation with Countrywide
mortgages that are under water.&amp;nbsp; If, after the expiration of three years, the bank has not applied
the full $500 million to provide such relief, any remainder will be paid
directly to the United States.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;According to the announcement,
this is the largest ever False Claims Act settlement relating to mortgage
fraud.&amp;nbsp; In addition to lending to
unqualified borrowers the allegations against Countrywide included claims that
they had originated loans based upon inflated appraisals.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The settlement was announced "as
part of the global resolution between the United States of America and the five
largest mortgage servicing banks in the country," but it is unclear whether the
$1 billion to be paid by Bank of America is part of the $25 billion master
settlement or an addition to that amount. &lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02092012_countrywide_mortgage_fraud.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246923/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246923" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>NAR: Home Affordability Increases Nationwide</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02092012_home_prices.asp" /><id>/02092012_home_prices.asp</id><published>2012-02-09T17:38:19Z</published><updated>2012-02-09T17:38:19Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;As prices continued to decline during
the fourth quarter of 2011 in most metropolitan areas of the U.S., &lt;b&gt;housing
affordability&lt;/b&gt; rose due not only to the lower prices but also because of &lt;a href="/mortgage_rates/"&gt;record
low interest rates&lt;/a&gt;.&amp;nbsp; The National
Association of Realtors&amp;reg; released its Housing Affordability Index (HAI) including
a new annual metro-level housing affordability index which shows historically
favorable conditions dominating across the country. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &lt;b&gt;median price&lt;/b&gt; of an existing single-family
home rose in 29 out of 149 metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) in the fourth
quarter compared to the fourth quarter of 2010.&amp;nbsp;
Prices were unchanged in two MSAs and fell in 118.&amp;nbsp; The national median existing home price was
$163,500 in the fourth quarter compared to $170,600 one year earlier, a
decrease of 4.2 percent.&amp;nbsp; Distressed
homes - foreclosures and short sales - sold for discounts averaging 15 to 20
percent and represented 30 percent of total sales compared to 34 percent during
the same quarter of 2010.&amp;nbsp; The median
price of a condo was $160,800, down 1.7 percent from one year earlier. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The
national HAI rose to a record high 184.5 in 2011.&amp;nbsp; The Index base of 100 is defined as the point
where a median-income household has exactly enough income to qualify for a
median priced existing home with a 20 percent down payment and 25 percent of
the income devoted to mortgage principal and interest payments.&amp;nbsp; The higher the index, the greater the
household purchasing power.&amp;nbsp; For
first-time buyers making small downpayments, the affordability levels are
relatively lower.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Existing
homes sales, including single-family houses and condos, increased 5.9 percent
to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.42 million compared to 4.17 million
in the third quarter.&amp;nbsp; This was 9.2
percent above the 4.04 million pace one year earlier.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Inventories
of existing homes fell 21.2 percent over the period between Q4 2010 and Q4 201,
dropping from 3.02 million homes for sale to 2.38 million &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The
share of all-cash home purchases in the fourth quarter was 29 percent, unchanged
from the third quarter and up one percentage point from the fourth quarter of
2010.&amp;nbsp; Investors, who are largely the all-cash purchasers, accounted for
19 percent of home sales in the third quarter virtually unchanged from the two
earlier reporting periods. First-time buyers purchased 33 percent of homes in
the fourth quarter again nearly unchanged from earlier quarters. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Sales
rose in &lt;b&gt;all four regions&lt;/b&gt; both from third quarter figures and those of one year
earlier, but prices declined.&amp;nbsp; The
largest annual increase in sales was in the Midwest where sales were up 14.1
percent from Q4 2010. Quarter-over-quarter sales were up at least 3.8 percent
in every region with the West showing the greatest increase at 8.1 percent. &amp;nbsp;Median prices now range from $134,100 in the
Midwest to $229,200 in the Northeast.&amp;nbsp; .&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lawrence Yun, NAR chief economist, said the figures reflect greater home
sales activity at lower price points.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;"Sales have risen strongly in
lower price ranges from one year ago, while sales at the upper end remain
sluggish," he said.&amp;nbsp; "More importantly, we're seeing a consistent trend of
declining inventory, which means supply and demand conditions are becoming more
balanced in more areas, which will help stabilize home prices."&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Metro
areas with the greatest housing affordability conditions in 2011 include the
Detroit-Warren-Livonia area of Michigan, with an index of 383.4; Toledo, Ohio,
at 242.9; and Decatur, Ill., at 236.8.&amp;nbsp; Only 24 out of 152 metros measured
had an affordability index below 100 in 2011.&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02092012_home_prices.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246901/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246901" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Mortgage Servicer Settlement Finally Reached</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02092012_attorneys_general_settlement.asp" /><id>/02092012_attorneys_general_settlement.asp</id><published>2012-02-09T16:51:05Z</published><updated>2012-02-09T16:51:05Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;A
final settlement between the nation's &lt;b&gt;five largest mortgage servicers&lt;/b&gt;, two federal
agencies and 49 of the states' attorneys general (AGs) was announced this
morning by officials representing the AGs, the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and
Housing and Urban Development (HUD). &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;The settlement, the result of &amp;nbsp;a 16 month nationwide investigation into
foreclosure abuses, fraud, and unacceptable mortgage servicing practices is, as
anticipated, for $25 billion dollars but there was no information released as
to which state was not participating in the action.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase
&amp;amp; Co., Wells Fargo &amp;amp; Company, Citibank, and Ally Financial, (formerly
GMAC) and their servicing subsidiaries have agreed to commit a minimum of $17
billion directly to borrowers through a series of relief effort options
including principal reduction.&amp;nbsp; Servicers
will likely provide up to an estimated $32 billion in direct homeowner relief.&amp;nbsp; There will be $4.2 billion paid directly to
the states and $750 million to the federal government.&amp;nbsp; In addition, a comprehensive set of new standards
will be implemented to protect homeowners from future abuses and an independent
monitor will be appointed to ensure servicer compliance.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nothing in the agreement grants any
immunity from criminal offenses and will not affect criminal
prosecutions.&amp;nbsp; The agreement does not prevent homeowners or investors from
pursuing individual, institutional or class action civil cases against the five
servicers.&amp;nbsp; The pact also enables state attorneys general and federal
agencies to investigate and pursue other aspects of the mortgage crisis,
including securities cases.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder
told an audience attending the announcement about the scope of the investigation
which led to the settlement calling it a remarkable example of cooperative law
enforcement.&amp;nbsp; It involved multiple
federal agencies working in partnership with state AG offices and state banking
regulators.&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;The U.S. Trustees Program alone reviewed more
than 37,000 bankruptcy documents and similar large-scale reviews were also
conducted by HUD, FHA, and others.&amp;nbsp; Holder said the investigations revealed
disturbing practices.&amp;nbsp;"For instance, we saw that - far too often -
servicers pushed borrowers into foreclosure, even though federal regulations
required the servicers to try other alternatives first.&amp;nbsp; These failures
didn't just hurt borrowers who might have been able to afford modified
mortgages.&amp;nbsp; They fueled the downward spiral of our economy - and of
communities nationwide."&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Holder stressed that, while the
agreement resolves some civil claims, it &lt;b&gt;does not prevent state and federal
authorities&lt;/b&gt; from pursuing criminal enforcement actions nor does it prevent any &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;claims by any individual borrowers who wish
to bring their own lawsuits.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;"I also want to note that,
with this settlement, we aren't just holding mortgage servicers accountable for
wrongs they committed.&amp;nbsp; We are using this opportunity to fix a broken
system, and to lay the groundwork for a better future.&amp;nbsp; Our nation's
leading mortgage servicers will be required to follow a new set of standards,
which will be overseen by an independent monitor." and will be enforceable in
federal court."&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller,
who led the settlement talks on behalf of the states said, "One of the hardest
battles I fought over the last 16 months was over &lt;b&gt;principal reduction&lt;/b&gt;.&amp;nbsp; At first the banks tried to tell us that was
a non-starter.&amp;nbsp; We kept fighting back, and now I'm very proud to say that
we got it across the finish line."&amp;nbsp; He said that targeted principal
reduction will be one of the keystones of the agreement, and will help keep
many families in their homes and out of foreclosure.&amp;nbsp; "People will see
that this works, it'll result in lower re-default rates, and I think it'll be a
catalyst for more."&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Miller released a statement through
his office that said the final agreement will be filed in U.S. District Court
in Washington, probably later this month, and will have the authority of a
court order.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;"Because of the complexity of the
&lt;a href="/mbs/"&gt;mortgage market&lt;/a&gt; and this agreement, which will span a three year period,
borrowers in some cases may be contacted directly by one of the five included
mortgage servicers regarding loan modification offers, may be contacted by a
settlement administrator or their state attorney general, or may need to
contact their mortgage servicer to obtain more information about specific
programs and whether their loan qualifies.&amp;nbsp; More information will be made
available as the settlement programs are implemented."&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Simultaneous with the settlement
agreement, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) announced it had
agreed in principal on a settlement of civil money penalties against four of
the five banks in connection with unsafe and unsound mortgage servicing and foreclosure
practices against which OCC had issued cease and desist orders last April.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Under this settlement the four banks
(Ally is not included in this action) agree not to contest the OCC's ability to
impose penalties totaling $394 million and the OCC agrees to hold in abeyance
imposition of such penalties if the servicers make payments or take other actions
under the larger federal-state settlement with a value of at least the penalty amounts
that each servicer agrees OCC could impose.&amp;nbsp;
Additional penalties will be assessed if the agreement is not fulfilled
within three years. &amp;nbsp;Bank of America is
liable for $164 million, Citibank, $34 million, Chase $113 million, and Wells
Fargo $83 million.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02092012_attorneys_general_settlement.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246896/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246896" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>"House Lock" - Negative Equity not Hurting Employment Numbers</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02092012_negative_equity_unemployment.asp" /><id>/02092012_negative_equity_unemployment.asp</id><published>2012-02-09T14:06:09Z</published><updated>2012-02-09T14:06:09Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;"&lt;b&gt;House lock&lt;/b&gt;" is not a major factor when
it comes to a homeowner's ability to find a job.&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;A
working paper commissioned by the &lt;b&gt;Federal Reserve Bank of Boston&lt;/b&gt; found that,
while many Americans lack mobility because their homes are "underwater" in
respect to their mortgages, this is only a marginal contributing factor to continued
unemployment.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Migration across states and among
homeowners has &lt;b&gt;fallen sharply&lt;/b&gt; at the same time as a widespread drop in housing
prices has resulted in wide-spread negative home equity. &amp;nbsp;According to CoreLogic, 10.7 million homes, 22.1
percent of all residential properties with a mortgage, were worth less than
their mortgages at the end of the third quarter of 2011 and an additional 2.4
million borrowers had less than 5 percent equity.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The nation's unemployment rate has
hovered around 9 percent since early 2009.&amp;nbsp;
At the same time, data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that,
despite increasing numbers of job openings since June of 2009, there has been
little increase in hiring. &amp;nbsp;Not only has
unemployment been especially persistent during this economic downturn, but
individuals have remained out of work for exceptionally long periods. &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Yet &lt;b&gt;some employers state that they cannot
find workers&lt;/b&gt; with the right mix of skills suggesting that some type of mismatch
might be occurring. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Data from the Internal Revenue Service
indicates that, while mobility across states has been declining gradually for
more than two decades, there has been a recent sharp downturn. &amp;nbsp;While migration across labor markets is cyclical,
the drop during this recession has been larger than in other post-war recessions.&amp;nbsp; It has also &lt;b&gt;disproportionately involved
homeowners&lt;/b&gt;.&amp;nbsp; The number of home owners
who moved cross-state between 2006 and 2009 fell by 25.5 percent versus a
decline of 13.6 percent among renters.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In their working paper, &amp;nbsp;&lt;i&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/wp/wp2012/wp1201.pdf"&gt;Are
American Homeowners Locked into Their Houses?&amp;nbsp;
The Impact of Housing Market Conditions on State-to-State Migration&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/i&gt;
Alicia Sasser Modestino and Julia Dennett of the Fed's New England Public
Policy Center looked at these three factors to determine whether having
negative equity in their homes prevents homeowners from relocating to states
with better job markets.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The concept of "housing lock" is not new
and a number of studies have examined how it might contribute to geographic
mobility.&amp;nbsp; However, much of the earlier
research has been restricted either in terms of the geographic area studied,
the length of the study, or the group studied (i.e. younger households.).&amp;nbsp; This was nationwide, included all demographic
groups, and used a time period that roughly coincides with the recession. The
study used a logistic regression framework to estimate the &lt;b&gt;impact of negative
equity&lt;/b&gt; on migration while controlling for changes in relative economics
conditions and differences in time-invariant characteristics between origin and
destination states.&amp;nbsp; Finally the authors
did a "back-of-the-envelope calculation" to determine the potential impact of
restricted mobility on the national unemployment rate.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The analysis found that negative equity
did reduce cross-state migration between 2006 and 2009.&amp;nbsp; A one-standard deviation increase in the
share of underwater households in the origin state reduces the outflow of
migrants to the destination state by 2.93 percent.&amp;nbsp; For the average origin-destination pair this
meant a reduction in out-migration between 0.595 to 0.578 per 1000 initial
residents or 85 migrants each year.&amp;nbsp;
Summed across all possible destination states this would mean a decrease
in the outflow from the average origin state of roughly 4,000 residents.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is a small number relative to total
migration in the U.S and reduces national migration by 0.05 percent or 110,000
to 150,000 fewer individuals migrating across state lines in any given year
compared to observed migration in 2008-2009 of 5.6 million persons.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Assuming that all migrants who were constrained
from moving due to negative equity were unemployed and seeking a job and that
they would have found employment in the new state, the &lt;b&gt;absence of house lock&lt;/b&gt;
would have reduced the nation's unemployment rate by &lt;b&gt;at most 0.10 percentage
points annually&lt;/b&gt; between 2006 and 2009 or a rate of 9.0 rather than 9.3 in
2009.&amp;nbsp; Recognizing that not all migrants
are job-seekers or would be successful in finding work after moving, "Yields a
national unemployment rate that is virtually unchanged from the actual one that
prevailed in each year." &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;The
disproportionate impact on the mobility of homeowners versus renters has no
effects on labor market statistics. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors conclude that it seems
reasonable for policymakers to focus on efforts that stimulate aggregate demand
in order to reduce unemployment rather than policies to reduce negative
impact.&amp;nbsp; Instead, increased efforts to
alleviate the housing sector's drag on the economy such as by assisting
homeowners to refinance or reducing foreclosures may be more effective in
stimulating aggregate demand and reducing the high rate of joblessness. &lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02092012_negative_equity_unemployment.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246867/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246867" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Ally said to be Shopping Mortgage Unit</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02082012_ally_fincl_tarp_recipients.asp" /><id>/02082012_ally_fincl_tarp_recipients.asp</id><published>2012-02-08T19:05:52Z</published><updated>2012-02-08T19:05:52Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;One of the financial institutions that are
party to the reported settlement agreement with the attorneys general of the
majority of the states is reportedly on the auction block.&amp;nbsp; According to Bloomberg News, &lt;b&gt;Ally Financial&lt;/b&gt; is
talking with private equity firms about selling its mortgage unit, &lt;b&gt;Residential
Capital LCC&lt;/b&gt;, through a pre-package bankruptcy.&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Any sale of the company would be
complicated by its recent financial history.&amp;nbsp;
The company was founded as General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC) in
1919 by General Motors as an intermediary to provide financing for the purchase
of its autos.&amp;nbsp; Over the years it expanded
into other types of lending and into real estate brokerage and adopted the acronym
as its brand name.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;GMAC was hard hit by the housing crash
and was one of the beneficiaries of Toxic Asset Relief Funds (TARP). &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;In addition to the company's potential liabilities
- a share of a reported $25 billion to be paid to the states in the above
referenced settlement deal represents merely one of the many suits arising out
of the company's role in the financial crisis - the U.S. Treasury has a large
stake in the parent company. According to the company's website, the Treasury owns
73.8 percent; other large stakeholders at less than 10 percent each are GM
Trust, Cerberus and affiliates, and third party investors.&amp;nbsp; In 2010, reportedly to distance the financial
arm from the auto company, its name was changed to Ally.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The company reported a fourth quarter
loss on a $270 million charge to cover expected penalties from regulators.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;According to Bloomberg, Ally has
contacted Fortress Investment Cerberus Capital Management, Centerbridge
Capital, and Leucadia National Corporation to see if they have any interest in
a purchase.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Bloomberg also said the company is seeking a sale in
order to limit its liability.&amp;nbsp; The
pre-packaged bankruptcy would allow it to reach agreements with creditors and
stakeholders before filing for court protection.&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02082012_ally_fincl_tarp_recipients.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246724/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246724" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Delinquencies, Foreclosures, and Inventories Improve in CoreLogic Data</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02082012_delinquencies_foreclosures.asp" /><id>/02082012_delinquencies_foreclosures.asp</id><published>2012-02-08T17:54:46Z</published><updated>2012-02-08T17:54:46Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;According to CoreLogic, the Santa Ana
California based provider of information and business services, there were a
total of &lt;b&gt;830,000 foreclosures nationwide in 2011 &lt;/b&gt;compared to 1.1 million in
2010.&amp;nbsp; The most recent monthly numbers, for
December 2011, were down from foreclosures both a month earlier and in December
2010.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There were 55,000 foreclosures during
the month of December, a drop of 2,000 from the November total and a
significant decrease from a year earlier when there were 67,000, a -15 percent
change.&amp;nbsp; According to CoreLogic, there
have been approximately 3.2 million foreclosures since the beginning of the
financial crisis in September 2008.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &lt;b&gt;foreclosure inventory&lt;/b&gt; - the stock of
homes in the process of foreclosure - also decreased on an annual and accelerating
basis.&amp;nbsp; There were 1.4 million homes, 3.4
percent of all mortgaged homes in the U.S.*, in the inventory in December.&amp;nbsp; This was a drop of 8.4 percent in the
inventory compared to December 2010.&amp;nbsp; The
November inventory had declined on an annual basis by 5.3 percent.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &lt;b&gt;serious delinquency rate&lt;/b&gt;, homeowners
who are 90 or more days in arrears on their mortgage payments, improved to 7.3
percent in December from 7.8 percent one year earlier but was up one basis
point compared to November.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;CoreLogic provides a metric that
indicates the rate at which servicers are processing distressed assets.&amp;nbsp; The distressed clearing ratio is calculated
by dividing the number of sales of lender-owned properties (REO) by completed
foreclosures.&amp;nbsp; The higher the ratio the
faster the REO inventory is clearing.&amp;nbsp; In
December the ratio was 1.03; in November it was 0.94.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Mark Fleming, chief economist with
CoreLogic, commented, "The inventory of foreclosed properties has begun to
shrink and the pace at which properties are entering foreclosure is
slowing.&amp;nbsp; While foreclosure filings are
being curtailed by a variety of judicial and regulatory constraints, mortgage
servicers are completing REO sales faster than they are completing foreclosures.&amp;nbsp; This is the first time in a year that REO
sales have outpaced completed foreclosures and part of the reason for the decrease
in the foreclosure inventory."&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Of the top 100 markets tracked by CoreLogic,
34 showed an increase in the foreclosure inventory in December versus one year
earlier.&amp;nbsp; In November inventories in 46
of the markets had increased.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;States with the highest percentage of foreclosure
inventories were Florida (11.9), New Jersey (6.4), Illinois (5.4), Nevada (5.4)
and New York (4.6).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;*Approximately one-third of U.S. homes
are owned without a mortgage. &amp;nbsp;These
properties do not enter into the calculations of distressed clearing ratios.&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02082012_delinquencies_foreclosures.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246693/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246693" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Refinancing Apps Rise on Record Low Rates</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02082012_mortgage_applications_survey.asp" /><id>/02082012_mortgage_applications_survey.asp</id><published>2012-02-08T13:58:46Z</published><updated>2012-02-08T13:58:46Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;Mortgage
rates broke another set of records during the week ended February 3,
establishing several new historic lows.&amp;nbsp;
In response, the seasonally adjusted Mortgage Bankers Association's (MBA)
Market Composite Index, a measure of &lt;b&gt;mortgage application volume&lt;/b&gt;, rose 7.5
percent and 8.7 percent on an unadjusted basis.&amp;nbsp;
&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The increases were
driven solely by refinancing which represented 80.5 percent of total applications for the week,
up from 80.0 percent the previous week.&amp;nbsp;
The Index measuring &lt;b&gt;applications for refinancing&lt;/b&gt; increased 9.4 percent over
that of the week ended January 27 but the seasonally adjusted basis the
&lt;b&gt;Purchase Index&lt;/b&gt; ticked up only 0.1 percent. The unadjusted Purchase Index was 6
percent higher than in the previous week and 4.1 percent lower than during the
same week in 2011.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The four-week
moving averages for the seasonally adjusted Market and Purchase Indices were up 4.88 percent and 0.65 percent respectively and
the moving average for the Refinance Index rose 5.72 percent.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Statistics for the
month of January indicate that investors played a slightly smaller part in the
purchase mortgage market than in December with the investor share of applications
for home purchase at 6.4 percent compared to 6.9 percent in December.&amp;nbsp; In
addition, the share of purchase mortgages for second homes increased to 5.9
percent in January from 5.4 percent in December.&amp;nbsp; The investor share of applications declined
in the West and East North Central regions.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Purchase Index vs 30 Yr Fixed&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/b&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[purchaseappschart]&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Refinance Index vs 30 Yr Fixed&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[refiappschart]&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Both the average
contract &lt;a href="/mortgage_rates/"&gt;interest rate&lt;/a&gt; and the effective rate for all types of mortgages with
loan-to-value ratios of 80 percent declined for the week and all fixed-rate
mortgages (FRM) reached new lows.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul class="unIndentedList"&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Rates for 30-year FRM with &lt;a name="ThFRMChange"&gt;onforming loan balances of $417,500
or less &lt;/a&gt;decreased to 4.05 percent from 4.09 percent, with points increasing to 0.44 from&lt;a name="ThFRMBPSChng"&gt; &lt;/a&gt;0.41 including the
origination fee.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Jumbo 30-year FRM, those with loan
balances &lt;a name="MBA30J_RateDir"&gt;greater
than $417,500,&lt;/a&gt; had averages
rates of 4.29 percent with .43 point compared to 4.33
percent with 0.41 point. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
The rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages backed by the
FHA decreased to 3.89 percent from 3.96 percent, with points increasing to 0.78
from 0.61.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Fifteen-year FRM had an average
rate of 3.33 percent, down 3 basis points from the previous week and points decreased to
0.37 from 0.41.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
The rate for 5/1 adjustable-rate mortgages (ARM) decreased to
2.91 percent from 2.94 percent, with points increasing
to 0.40 from 0.39. The ARM share of mortgage
applications was up to 6.0 percent from 5.6
percent the previous week.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;MBA's Weekly
Mortgage Applications Survey covers over 75 percent of all U.S. retail
residential mortgage applications, and has been conducted weekly since
1990.&amp;nbsp; Respondents include mortgage bankers, commercial banks and
thrifts.&amp;nbsp; Base period and value for all indexes is March 16, 1990=100.&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02082012_mortgage_applications_survey.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246665/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246665" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>House Committee Acts on Bill to Protect FHA Fund</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02072012_fha_insurance_fund.asp" /><id>/02072012_fha_insurance_fund.asp</id><published>2012-02-07T21:11:47Z</published><updated>2012-02-07T21:11:47Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;A sub-committee of the House Financial Services
committee today approved the &lt;b&gt;FHA Emergency Solvency Act&lt;/b&gt; which is intended to
shore up the finances of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA).&amp;nbsp; The legislation strengthens FHA's Mortgage Insurance
Fund by establishing minimum annual premiums for mortgage insurance; barring
unscrupulous lenders from participating in the program, improving the FHA's
internal financial controls, transparency, and disclosure requirements, and
requires lenders who commit fraud to repay any losses suffered by FHA as a
consequence. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;FHA's cash reserves have been hard-hit
by the housing crash and have fallen below 2 percent Congress has mandated it
must maintain.&amp;nbsp; According to the
subcommittee's press release, the agency's finances have deteriorated to the
point where a bailout might be required in 2012 if the housing market worsens
further.&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;"The FHA's cash reserves are &lt;b&gt;down to dangerous
levels&lt;/b&gt;, and taxpayers cannot afford another Fannie- and Freddie-style bailout,"
said Rep. Biggert.&amp;nbsp; "This Administration needs to enforce stronger
standards and create room for the private sector to replace taxpayers as the
primary source of funding.&amp;nbsp; The FHA is facing an urgent fiscal crisis, and
this proposal gives HUD Secretary Donovan emergency tools to wind down the risk
before it's too late."&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Also on Tuesday the Subcommittee approved the Affordable Housing and Self-Sufficiency Improvement Act,&lt;b&gt; &lt;/b&gt;which
is intended to expand opportunities for low-income families that receive
housing assistance to achieve self-sufficiency and reduces the costs of HUD's
affordable housing programs and the
Homeless Children and Youth Act, which harmonizes HUD's definition of
homeless children with that of other agencies like the Department of Education,
allowing HUD to more accurately estimate the number of homeless in the U.S.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All three measures were passed by
voice vote.&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02072012_fha_insurance_fund.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246569/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246569" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Majority of States Reported on Board with Robo-Signing Settlement</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02072012_attorneys_general_settlement.asp" /><id>/02072012_attorneys_general_settlement.asp</id><published>2012-02-07T16:29:56Z</published><updated>2012-02-07T16:29:56Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;Details are still sketchy, but
apparently a settlement has been agreed upon between five major banks and a
majority of the states' attorneys general.&amp;nbsp;
The settlement involves Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citigroup,
JPMorgan Chase, and Ally Financial and arises out of charges that the banks and
their subsidiary servicers used robo-signing and other abuses in processing
thousands of foreclosures. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The settlement was announced by lead
negotiator, &lt;b&gt;Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller&lt;/b&gt; who, according to CNBC said of the
deal, "This enables us to move forward
into the very final stages of remaining work. Federal and state officials, as
well as representatives from the banks, continue to address matters that they
must complete before finalizing any settlement," Miller said in a statement
released late Monday...&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02072012_attorneys_general_settlement.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246488/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246488" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>January Housing Scorecard Released by HUD, Treasury</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02062012_hamp_housing_scorecard.asp" /><id>/02062012_hamp_housing_scorecard.asp</id><published>2012-02-06T21:41:01Z</published><updated>2012-02-06T21:41:01Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;The
Departments of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Treasury issued the
administration's &lt;b&gt;January Housing Scorecard&lt;/b&gt; on Monday.&amp;nbsp; The report is essentially a summary of
data on housing and housing finance released by public and private sources over
the previous month and/or quarter.&amp;nbsp; Most
of the data such as new and existing home sales, permits and starts, mortgage
originations, and various house price evaluations have been previously covered
by MND.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The scorecard incorporates by reference
the monthly report of the Making Home Affordable Program (MHA) through the end
of December.&amp;nbsp; This includes information
on the universe of MHA programs including the Home Affordable Modification
Program (HAMP), HOPE Now, and Second Lien Modifications and other initiatives.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Since the
HAMP program began in April 2009 1,774,595 homeowners have entered into trial
loan modifications, 20,074 since the November HAMP report.&amp;nbsp; About half of these homeowners, 933,327, have
completed the trials and converted to permanent modifications; 23,374
conversions took place during the current report period.&amp;nbsp; Just over three-quarters of a million of the permanent
modifications are still active.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While the
HAMP program dates to April 2009, it underwent substantial revisions to its
policies and procedures in June 2010, and many of the measures of its
performance are benchmarked at that time.&amp;nbsp;
Eight-four percent of homeowners who entered a trial modification after
that date have received a permanent modification with an average trial period
of 3.5 months compared to 43 percent who entered a trial prior to the changes.&amp;nbsp; As of December, 21,002 of the active trials
had been underway for six months or more; in May 2010, the month before the
changes took place, 190,000 trials were six months old or more.&amp;nbsp; In December every servicer except Ocwen was
above an 80 percent conversion rate.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/2102_2E00_/Jan2012_2D00_HousingScorecard.png" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;HAMP
modifications with the largest reduction in mortgage payments continue to
demonstrate the lowest redefault rates.&amp;nbsp; At
18 months after modification all loans have a 90+ day default rate of 23
percent.&amp;nbsp; However, loans with a 20
percent or smaller reduction in loan payment are defaulting at the rate of 36.4
percent while loans with a 50 percent payment decrease or greater have a
default rate of 13.3 percent.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/2102_2E00_/Jan2012_2D00_HousingScorecard_2D00_2.png" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Home
Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives program offers incentives to homeowners who
wish to exit home ownership through a short sale or deed-in-lieu of
foreclosure.&amp;nbsp; Thus far 43,368 homeowners
have been accepted into the program and 27,665 transactions have been
completed, the vast majority through a short sale.&amp;nbsp; More than half of the completed transactions
(18,350) were on loans owned by private investors; 7,711 were portfolio loans
and 1,604 were GSE loans.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There has
been an emphasis in some quarters on reducing the principal balance of
distressed loans since the last HAMP report.&amp;nbsp;
Some members of Congress have asked for justification from the GSEs as
to why they were not participating in principal reductions and the Treasury
Department recently urged them to do so as well while tripling the incentives
it is paying to other investors to reduce principal.&amp;nbsp; The HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative
(PRA) has started trial modifications for 63,203 home owners and permanent
modifications for 42,753 of which 40,374 are still active.&amp;nbsp; The median principal amount reduced in these
modifications is $67,196, a median of 31.1 percent of the principal balance.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Each month
HAMP reports on selected servicer performance metrics. &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Servicers
are expected to make Right Party Contact (RPC) with eligible homeowners and
then evaluate their eligibility for HAMP. &amp;nbsp;HAMP evaluated servicer outreach to 60 days
delinquent homeowners over the previous 12 months (November 2010-December 2011)
and found most services have made RPC at least 85 percent of the time; however
there is a wide range of performance results in terms of completed the evaluations.
&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/2102_2E00_/Jan2012_2D00_HousingScorecard_2D00_3.png" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Servicers
are also expected to identify and solicit homeowners in early stages of
delinquency and, effective October 1, 2011, a higher compensation structure was
put into effect to reward servicers who complete evaluations and place
homeowners in a trial modification within 120 days of first delinquency.&amp;nbsp; The table below shows the status of major
servicers relative to their eligibility for maximum incentives. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/2102_2E00_/Jan2012_2D00_HousingScorecard_2D00_4.png" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02062012_hamp_housing_scorecard.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246371/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246371" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Industrial and Multi-family Loans Drive Annual CRE Increase</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02062012_commercial_lending.asp" /><id>/02062012_commercial_lending.asp</id><published>2012-02-06T21:17:18Z</published><updated>2012-02-06T21:17:18Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;The Mortgage Bankers Association
(MBA) reports that commercial and multifamily loan originations were down 7
percent in the fourth quarter of 2011 compared to the third quarter but were 13
percent higher than originations in the fourth quarter a year earlier.&amp;nbsp; The year-over year change was driven by
originations for both industrial and multifamily properties which increased 43
percent and 31 percent respectively from Q4 2010.&amp;nbsp; On the negative side, retail loans were down
8 percent, loans for healthcare properties fell 24 percent, office properties
were down 29 percent and hotel originations decreased 44 percent.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Quarter over quarter results were
mixed.&amp;nbsp; There was a 153 percent jump in
originations for health care properties; industrial loans were up 51 percent
and multifamily properties increased 29 percent.&amp;nbsp; Originations for healthcare properties fell 52
percent, office properties were down 39 percent, and retail property loans
decreased 24 percent.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Looking at lending by investor groups,
commercial bank portfolios were up by 122 percent compared to the fourth
quarter of 2010 and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae (the GSEs) increased lending 17
percent.&amp;nbsp; Life insurance companies and
conduits for commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS) decreased lending by
23 percent and 50 percent respectively. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;On a quarter-over-quarter basis only the GSEs
increased their loans, which rose 34 percent to an all time high.&amp;nbsp; Conduits for CMBS were down 26 percent, life
insurance companies decreased lending by 23 percent, and commercial bank
portfolios declined by 16 percent. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;"MBA's Commercial/Multifamily
Mortgage Bankers Origination Index hit record levels for life insurance
companies in the second and third quarters of 2011," said Jamie Woodwell,
MBA's Vice President of Commercial Real Estate Research. "In the fourth
quarter, multifamily originations for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac hit a new
all-time high. While the CMBS market continued to be held back by broader
capital markets uncertainty during the past year, others - like the GSEs, life
companies and many bank portfolios - increased their appetite for commercial
and multifamily loans."&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Commercial/Multi-family
Originations by Investor Types&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;table border="1" bordercolor="#efefef" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0"&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td rowspan="2" valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Investor
  Type&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td colspan="2" valign="top" width="180"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Origination Volume Index*&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td rowspan="2" valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;% Chg&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q4-Q4&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td colspan="2" valign="top" width="213"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Average Loan Size ($millions)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q3 2011&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q4 2011&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q3 2011&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q4 2011&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Conduits&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;42&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;31&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;-50&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;30.5&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;23.9&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Commercial
  Banks&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;169&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;143&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;122&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;11.8&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;7.8&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Life
  Insurance &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;282&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;216&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;-13&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;20.5&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;14.0&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;GSEs&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;176&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;236&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;17&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;13.8&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;14.3&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Total&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;138&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;129&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;13&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;14,9&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;11.6&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;
&lt;p&gt;*2001 Ave. Quarter = 100&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Commercial/Multi-family
Originations by Property Types&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;table border="1" bordercolor="#efefef" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0"&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td rowspan="2" valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Investor
  Type&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td colspan="2" valign="top" width="180"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Origination Volume Index*&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td rowspan="2" valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;% Chg&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q4-Q4&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td colspan="2" valign="top" width="213"&gt;
&lt;p align="left"&gt;Average Loan Size ($millions)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q3 2011&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q4 2011&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q3 2011&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="center"&gt;Q4 2011&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Multi-family&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;140&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;181&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;31&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;13.2&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;13.5&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Office&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;91&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;56&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;-29&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;19.1&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;11.7&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Retail
  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;222&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;169&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;-8&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;20.9&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;12.3&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Industrial&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;142&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;214&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;43&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;12.4&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;16.2&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Hotel&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;231&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;110&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;-44&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;39.0&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;20.1&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="187"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Health
  Care&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;91&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="90"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;229&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="58"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;-24&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;7.2&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td valign="top" width="106"&gt;
&lt;p align="right"&gt;12.4&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;
&lt;p&gt;*2001 Ave. Quarter = 100&lt;/p&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02062012_commercial_lending.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246335/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246335" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Nearly 100 Metro Areas on Improving Market List</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/02062012_house_prices.asp" /><id>/02062012_house_prices.asp</id><published>2012-02-06T18:26:00Z</published><updated>2012-02-06T18:26:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;The list of Improving Housing Markets (IHM) maintained by
the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) took another big jump in
February, rising from 76 in January and more than doubling the 41 reported in
December.&amp;nbsp; There are now &lt;b&gt;98 metropolitan
areas&lt;/b&gt; representing 36 states included on the list.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The IHM identifies metropolitan areas that have shown
improvement from their respective troughs on each of three metrics -
employment, housing permits, and home prices - for at least six consecutive
months.&amp;nbsp; NAHB uses data from the Bureau
of Labor Statistics, the U.S. Census Bureau, and Freddie Mac to measure
improved performance.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The additions to the February Index include some
metropolitan areas that had been particularly weak including Miami, Detroit,
Memphis, Kansas City, Missouri; Portland, Oregon, and Salt Lake City.&amp;nbsp; NAHB points out that inclusion in the Index
does not indicate strong recovery, merely that some of these troubled areas are
coming off of extreme lows.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Seven metro areas dropped off of the Index in February due
to softening housing prices.&amp;nbsp; One of
these was Washington, DC, one of the few areas that had continued to show
strong prices and sales through 2011.&amp;nbsp; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
"While many of the markets on the February IMI are far from fully
recovered, the index points out where employment, home prices and housing
production are no longer retreating and have held above their lowest recession
troughs for six months or more," said NAHB Chief Economist David Crowe.
"This is a sign that a large cross section of the country is starting to
turn the corner as local economic conditions stabilize."&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;table border="1" bordercolor="#cccccc" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="600"&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;b&gt;MSA&amp;nbsp;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;b&gt;Permits Trough Date&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;b&gt;Growth From Trough&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;b&gt;Prices Trough Date&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;b&gt;Growth From Trough&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;b&gt;Employment Trough Date&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;b&gt;Growth From Trough&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;&lt;a name="Print_Area"&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Florence, AL&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Tuscaloosa, AL&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Fayetteville, AR&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Napa, CA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;31.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Boulder, CO&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Denver, CO&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;7&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Fort Collins, CO&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Greeley, CO&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Bridgeport, CT&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;New Haven, CT&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;26.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Cape Coral, FL&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Deltona, FL&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;15.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Jacksonville, FL&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Miami, FL&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;7.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;North Port, FL&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Punta Gorda, FL&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;17&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Tampa, FL&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Athens, GA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;19&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Augusta, GA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/08&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;20&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Honolulu, HI&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/08&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;21&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Ames, IA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;7.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;22&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Davenport, IA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;23&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Des Moines, IA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;24&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Dubuque, IA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/08&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;25&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Waterloo, IA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;26&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Elkhart, IN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;27&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Indianapolis, IN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;28&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Lafayette, IN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;15.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;29&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Muncie, IN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;30&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Lake Charles, LA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;31&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Monroe, LA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;32&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Shreveport, LA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;33&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Boston, MA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;34&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Springfield, MA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;35&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Cumberland, MD&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;36&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Lewiston, ME&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;16.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;37&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Ann Arbor, MI&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;38&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Detroit, MI&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;39&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Grand Rapids, MI&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;7.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;40&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Lansing, MI&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;41&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Monroe, MI&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;7.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;42&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Muskegon, MI&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;43&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Duluth, MN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;09/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;44&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Minneapolis, MN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;09/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;45&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Rochester, MN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;46&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Columbia, MO&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/08&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;47&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Jefferson City, MO&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;48&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Joplin, MO&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;15.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;49&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Kansas City, MO&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;50&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Hattiesburg, MS&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;51&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Fayetteville, NC&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/08&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;52&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Winston-Salem, NC&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;53&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Bismarck, ND&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;15.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/07&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;54&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Fargo, ND&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;55&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Grand Forks, ND&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;7.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;09/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;56&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Lincoln, NE&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;57&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Omaha, NE&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;58&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Manchester, NH&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;59&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Ocean City, NJ&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;60&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Syracuse, NY&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;61&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Cincinnati, OH&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;62&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Springfield, OH&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;13.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;63&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Toledo, OH&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;64&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Youngstown, OH&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;65&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Oklahoma City, OK&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;66&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Tulsa, OK&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;67&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Corvallis, OR&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;68&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Portland, OR&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;69&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Erie, PA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;70&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Philadelphia, PA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;71&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Pittsburgh, PA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;72&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Williamsport, PA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;46.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;73&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Chattanooga, TN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;74&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Clarksville, TN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;75&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Kingsport, TN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;76&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Memphis, TN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;09/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;77&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Nashville, TN&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;09/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;78&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Amarillo, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10/31/08&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;79&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;College Station, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/07&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;80&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Corpus Christi, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;81&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Dallas, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;05/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;82&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Laredo, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/08&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;09/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;7.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;83&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Longview, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;7.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;84&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;McAllen, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/07&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;85&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Midland, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;86&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Odessa, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;24.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;9.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;87&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Tyler, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;07/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;88&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Victoria, TX&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;09/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;89&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Provo, UT&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;90&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Salt Lake City, UT&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;91&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Danville, VA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;92&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Winchester, VA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;7.9%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;5.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;93&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Burlington, VT&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;09/30/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;94&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Bellingham, WA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;04/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;06/30/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;95&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Kennewick, WA&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;03/31/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/07&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;4.4%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;96&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Madison, WI&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;1.3%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;02/28/11&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;0.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;08/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;97&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Casper, WY&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;11/30/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;7.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/09&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;8.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr height="20"&gt;
&lt;td height="20" align="right"&gt;98&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Cheyenne, WY&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/08&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;6.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;12/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;3.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;01/31/10&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;2.8%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;...(&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/02062012_house_prices.asp"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;&lt;div style="background-color:#D4EDC9;border:1px solid #BDD4B3;padding:3px 5px 3px 6px; color:#000000;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forward this article via email:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/246328/3/forward.aspx" style="color:#3333CC;"&gt;Send a copy of this story&lt;/a&gt; to someone you know that may want to read it.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=246328" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>jpatswanson</name><uri>http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/members/jpatswanson/default.aspx</uri></author></entry></feed>
