On:

Century 21 is riding a wave of franchise acquisitions and merger activity — a trend Chief Operating Officer Greg Sexton says is driven by the escalating demands of real estate technology.

Sexton, who has spent more than two decades with the company, said the aggressive push into mergers and acquisitions (M&A) began as a strategic initiative following the pandemic and has since transformed into a core component of the brand’s identity.

The company has positioned itself to lead an industry-wide consolidation trend that Sexton sees occurring in markets across the country.

One of the most notable shifts, he explained, is that acquisitions are no longer confined to geographic boundaries.

“[Mergers and acquisitions] are now are being done from state to state across the country, meaning you can have a branded company like we have in Wisconsin that ends up doing a large acquisition out in San Diego,” Sexton said. “That would have never occurred years ago, but because of technology, you can have the infrastructure at a hub office that allows you to do M&As throughout the country. Consolidation is happening everywhere.”

Century 21 has completed 16 merger and acquisition deals so far in 2026, following 24 transactions last year — a roughly 40% increase from 2022’s total of 17.

Among the 2026 acquisitions are firms in South Carolina, Illinois, Florida, California, Wisconsin, Arizona and Georgia.

Compass merger brings tech edge

The integration of Century 21 under the Compass International Holdings umbrella following Anywhere Real Estate’s acquisition has played a significant role in the brand’s M&A momentum.

Sexton said the combination has created considerable conversation in the marketplace, particularly around technology — a factor he described as paramount for broker-owners.

“By coming together and having Compass technology that’s [will be] available for our Century 21 agents in the future, it’s made a huge difference,” he said. “It caused us to go out and have those conversations to say, ‘Hey, technology is only going to continue to grow and only going to be more expensive. You need to get with a brand that’s going to be able to provide that.’”

Sexton identified a GCI (gross commission income) threshold for independent brokerages considering affiliation.

“Once you get above $2 million in GCI, it really becomes so important that you have the tools and the resources, the marketing,” he said.

Coaching franchisees through the ‘scary’ M&A process

Sexton emphasized that Century 21 distinguishes itself by immediately training new franchisees on how to pursue their own acquisitions. He said the company has developed a comprehensive coaching program to guide broker-owners through what can be a daunting process.

“We have a whole training course that we put together that takes them through the entire process,” said Sexton. “One of the things that I love about mergers and acquisitions in real estate is that it’s different than any other industry, because you are literally selling something that is an intangible.”

He said conversations often center on helping broker-owners return to the meat and potatoes of the business they enjoy most.

“We talk about going back to doing those things that you love by moving your business to a company that has a great infrastructure,” said Sexton. “It’s about having resources that can do those things that, frankly, you don’t like to do [on your own].”

Broker-owner role evolves beyond production

Sexton said the role of the franchise owner has undergone a fundamental transformation over the past two to three decades. He noted that it is now nearly impossible for broker-owners who are also active producers to successfully grow a company.

“Years ago, the broker-owner was also often a producer and was out there actually driving their own production,” said Sexton. “That meant listing, selling — doing those things that they love to do, while also trying to own and operate a company. That is very rare now, and I would say almost impossible if you’re going to be a successful growing real estate company.

“The demands of owning and operating and providing all those resources and training for your agents requires a full-time job and requires a full-time staff.”

Sexton said the long-term outlook for M&A activity remains robust, — with local brokers increasingly questioning how they can compete.

With technology costs rising, consumer expectations climbing and the gap between small and large players widening, Sexton predicted that the consolidation wave still has considerable room to run.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Apartment renters are finally seeing relief across much of the United States, but booming artificial intelligence markets are creating a very different story in some of the country’s largest technology hubs.

According to Apartment List’s June national rent report, the median U.S. apartment rent stood at approximately $1,385, down 1.2% from a year earlier and about 4% below its 2022 peak.

The improvement follows one of the largest apartment construction booms in decades.

More than 600,000 new multifamily housing units were completed during 2024—the highest annual total since the mid-1980s—giving renters more choices and increasing competition among landlords.

As vacancies have risen, many property owners have responded by offering incentives including free rent, waived application fees and discounted parking to attract tenants.

National apartment vacancy rates have climbed to roughly 7%, easing the intense competition that characterized the housing market during and immediately after the pandemic.

The national picture, however, masks significant regional differences.

According to Apartments.com, San Francisco recorded one of the nation’s fastest annual rent increases, with rents rising more than 9% over the past year.

Nearby San Jose also experienced strong rent growth.

Housing analysts attribute much of that increase to the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence companies.

Technology firms including OpenAI, Anthropic and other AI developers continue hiring aggressively, bringing highly paid workers back into the Bay Area and increasing demand for housing near major employment centers.

By contrast, several Sun Belt cities that experienced rapid apartment construction over recent years are now seeing rents decline.

Markets including Austin, San Antonio, Phoenix and Denver have recorded year-over-year rent decreases as newly completed apartment communities compete for tenants.

Industry researchers say housing supply remains the primary factor influencing rental prices nationwide.

Areas that added large numbers of new apartments generally experienced slower rent growth or outright declines, while markets with limited supply and strong job creation continue seeing prices increase.

Despite improving conditions in many cities, affordability remains a major challenge.

The Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies reports that a record number of American renters continue spending more than 30% of their income on housing, with millions spending over half of their income on rent and utilities.

Even after recent declines, national rents remain significantly higher than they were before the pandemic.

For renters, today’s market presents better negotiating opportunities than existed just a few years ago.

Landlords in many cities are once again offering concessions and becoming more flexible during lease negotiations.

For developers and investors, however, slowing rent growth has reduced returns in many markets and contributed to fewer new apartment construction projects moving forward.

Economists say the slowdown in new construction could eventually tighten housing supply again, placing upward pressure on rents in future years.

For now, renters across much of the country are benefiting from increased apartment availability, while the nation’s rapidly expanding AI industry continues creating localized housing demand in some of America’s most expensive metropolitan areas.

JBizNews Desk | New York
© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or Distribution without Written Permission is Prohibited.

On:

Not every housing policy labeled “affordable” is actually designed to make housing more affordable. That is the central problem with today’s “missing middle” debate.

Across the country, duplexes, triplexes, courtyard apartments, townhomes and small multifamily buildings are being promoted as the solution to America’s housing affordability crisis. The argument sounds clean and appealing: allow more housing types, create more inclusive neighborhoods, and add diversity and affordability will follow.

But that framing quietly conflates two very different objectives. Housing affordability is an economic problem. Neighborhood diversity is a social policy goal.

They may overlap at times, but they are not the same thing. Treating them as interchangeable has fueled a housing debate that promises lower prices while often pursuing a completely different vision for how communities should be organized. That distinction matters.

America was built on frontier, not forced proximity

The American dream was not born of the idea that every family should find a discounted unit in an already-expensive neighborhood. It was built on motion, expansion, ownership, and the ability to pursue opportunity elsewhere. The cultural script was not, “How do we all fit into the same handful of elite metros?” It was, “Go West. Build. Own. Start over. Create something.”

Frederick Jackson Turner’s frontier thesis argued that the American character was shaped by the westward push into new territory: land, risk, self-reliance and reinvention. In housing terms, that dream looked like ordinary families moving outward, building new towns, and eventually owning their own homes.

Today, much of the housing debate has lost that instinct. Instead of asking how we create more places where families can live affordably, many policymakers ask how to retrofit high-demand neighborhoods to accommodate every income level, preference, and lifestyle expectation at below-market prices. That is not a housing strategy. That is a social aspiration colliding with land economics. Affordability Is About Math

At its core, affordability is not complicated. It is about the relationship among supply, demand, income, land costs, capital costs, construction costs, taxes, insurance, regulation, and time. If a region does not build enough homes for a growing population, prices rise. If incomes do not keep pace with housing costs, affordability declines. If permitting takes years, infrastructure lags, land is constrained, and every project is burdened by political friction, housing prices rise before a single nail is driven. 

That is not ideology. That is arithmetic.

Over the past decade, that math has turned against millions of American households. In many large metropolitan areas, home prices have risen far faster than incomes. Households that once could move from an expensive neighborhood to a more affordable nearby community now often find the entire region has become expensive. That is the key point. When prices rise everywhere, affordability is no longer just a neighborhood problem. It is a regional supply problem.

Missing Middle does not escape land economics

The missing-middle argument often implies that altering building form changes affordability outcomes. Replace one house with a duplex. Replace a block of detached homes with townhomes. Add triplexes near transit. Allow courtyard apartments in established neighborhoods.

Sometimes that creates more options. Sometimes that is good planning. But it does not magically create affordability. In high-demand neighborhoods, the land is already expensive. The entitlement process is expensive. Construction is expensive. Financing is expensive. Taxes and insurance are expensive. By the time a new missing-middle product reaches the market, it is usually priced at or near the prevailing market rate. The building form changes. The price often does not.

A new townhome in a desirable urban neighborhood is not automatically affordable just because it shares a wall. A duplex on expensive land does not become middle-class housing simply because it is a duplex. A courtyard apartment in a high-income neighborhood may add density, but density alone does not suspend the laws of cost. More housing helps over time. But missing-middle housing is not inherently affordable housing. That is the mistake.

Supply works regionally, not symbolically

The best argument for missing-middle reform is not that it instantly creates cheap homes. It does not. The better argument is that allowing more housing types can incrementally expand supply, increase product variety, and ease pressure over time. That is reasonable. But it is not the same as claiming missing-middle zoning is an affordability solution. Affordability improves when enough housing is produced across an entire region to shift the balance between supply and demand.

That means infrastructure, permitting capacity, predictable approvals, scalable development, construction efficiency, capital formation, land availability, product diversity, regional growth planning and political seriousness. It does not mean pretending that a handful of duplexes in a high-demand neighborhood will materially change what a teacher, firefighter, nurse, police officer, or young family can afford across a metro area. America does not have a shortage of housing rhetoric. It has a shortage of housing production.

When the debate turns moral, the math gets lost

One reason this conversation has become so confused is that housing affordability has increasingly been framed as a moral failure rather than an economic imbalance.

Expensive neighborhoods are described as exclusionary by default. Rising prices are treated as proof of injustice. A lack of socioeconomic diversity is taken as evidence that something improper must have occurred.

Sometimes discrimination and exclusion are real. When they are, they should be addressed directly through fair-housing enforcement, anti-discrimination rules, and targeted reforms. But a neighborhood becoming expensive is not, by itself, evidence of wrongdoing.

More often, it means demand has outstripped supply.

That distinction matters because the policy response should match the actual problem. If the goal is affordability, the answer is a larger total housing supply delivered at scale. If the goal is socioeconomic diversity within specific neighborhoods, say that clearly and evaluate those policies on that basis. Do not sell one as the other. One objective seeks lower prices. The other seeks a different distribution of residents. Both may be legitimate public debates, but they are not the same debate.

The real question policymakers avoid

The uncomfortable truth is that many affordability debates sidestep the hardest question:Are we trying to make housing less expensive, or are we trying to decide who should live where?Those are very different missions.

If policymakers want broader affordability, they need to focus on regional supply, infrastructure, the speed of entitlements, construction costs, development feasibility, and the ability to create new communities where ordinary families can buy or rent at attainable prices. If policymakers want more income mixing in established neighborhoods, they should be honest about that goal. That may involve subsidies, vouchers, inclusionary zoning, public land strategies, or mobility programs. But those tools should be judged by whether they achieve social-mixing objectives—not by pretending they will solve the broader affordability crisis.

The missing middle can be part of a housing toolkit. It can add flexibility, create more varied product types, and help some households find options that did not previously exist. But it is not a silver bullet. And it is certainly not a substitute for building enough housing in the places where growth is actually occurring.

The frontier still matters

A serious housing strategy should not be built on the fantasy that every household can consume more location, more amenities, more space and more neighborhood prestige at a discount to reality. That is not the American dream. That is entitlement dressed up as planning.

The American dream has always been more demanding and more optimistic than that. It calls for building new places, opening new frontiers, expanding opportunity and creating communities where families can own, grow and belong. That does not mean every household gets to live in the most expensive neighborhood at a subsidized price. It means the country must remain capable of producing new places where opportunity remains attainable. That is the real affordability test.

The missing middle may be a useful planning tool and even a desirable social vision. But let’s stop pretending it is, by itself, an affordability strategy. It is not. Affordability is measured by prices, payments, incomes and supply, not slogans.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Last week saw an escalation of the Iran conflict, with missile strikes and rising mortgage rates as a result, but housing demand still held firm and inventory was only down a smidge year over year. We should be mindful that our data was hit by the 4th of July weekend, but even with that, demand was still positive year over year. Also, be prepared for a rebound in the data next week and look at it in context.

Let’s dive into the tracker data for last week.

Weekly pending sales

Our pending home sales data provides a week-to-week perspective, though results can be affected by holidays and short-term fluctuations. This weekly pending sales data typically takes 30-60 days to be reflected in the sales data. 

We had the traditional July 4th weekend hit to the data, which happens every year, but even with that, demand was still positive year over year. Seasonality is kicking in on our weekly data line, but we always keep an eye out for year-over-year. 

Here are the pending sales for last week over the last two years:

  • 2026: 63,971
  • 2025: 61,143

Mortgage purchase application data

Purchase application data is traditionally a forward-looking data line that looks out 30-90 days. This year, outside of two weeks, purchase apps have shown positive year-over-year growth. Last week, we had a 1% week-to-week decline but 5% year-over-year growth. Post-COVID, I would like to see at least 12-14 weeks of positive week-to-week data alongside year-over-year growth data. So far, the week to week data has been flat while the year-over-year data has shown growth.

Here are the stats on purchase apps so far in 2026

  • 11 positive week-to-week prints
  • 13 negative week-to-week prints
  • 2 flat week-to-week prints
  • 10 weeks of double-digit year-over-year growth
  • 24 weeks of positive year-over-year growth
  • 2 negative year-over-year prints

chart visualization

Housing inventory

Over the past few weeks, housing inventory has gone negative year over year, which isn’t a shock to those who have been reading the Housing Market Tracker the last 12 months. Some people just naturally assumed inventory would have been back at 2019 levels this year, but demand has picked up a bit, slowing inventory growth a lot over the last 12 months. 

Some of our weekly data has been negative year-over-year, but only by a smidge. Last week, the National Association of Realtors reported its inventory data was down month-to-month. Remember that housing inventory is up from the lows we saw during Covid and are at much healthier levels than what we had from years 2020-2023. 

Housing inventory was impacted by the holiday weekend; look for a rebound in the data next week. 

  • Weekly inventory change:(July 3-July 10): Inventory fell from to 852,241 to 844,011
  • Same week last year: (July 4-July 11): Inventory fell from 853,160 to 846,843

chart visualization

New listings

Seasonality in the new listings data is here; we will see a slow decline toward the end of the year, then start right back up again next year.  Traditionally, there would be 80,000-100,000 new listings during the seasonal peak weeks, but we’ve only cracked above 80,000 four times this year and never in back-to-back weeks. Still, new listing data for 2025 and 2026 are better than in 2023 and 2024. This year, we just had a bit more demand than at the start of last year.

Some context for those who believe that the new listings data resembles the housing bubble years: new listings during that time ranged from 250,000 to 400,000 per week for several years.

Here is last week’s new listings data for the past two years:

  • 2026: 63,405
  • 2025:  60,726

chart visualization

Price-cut percentage

Typically, about one-third of homes undergo price reductions before they sell, reflecting the dynamic nature of the housing market. For the most part, price-cut percentages this year have been lower than last year. This is a by-product of inventory growth slowing down and, in some weeks, the data being negative year over year. 

In my 2026 home-price forecast, I had a negative 0.62% call for the year nationally. Home-price growth really isn’t going anywhere this year, but the percentage of price cuts has been lower year over year for most of 2026.  My forecast of negative -0.62% might be hard to achieve: even though home-price growth isn’t positive by much this year, it is still positive.

The price-cut percentage for last week:

  • 2026: 39.57%
  • 2025: 41%

chart visualization

10-year yield and mortgage rates

In the 2026 HousingWire forecast, I anticipated the following ranges:

  • Mortgage rates between 5.75% and 6.75%
  • The 10-year yield fluctuating between 3.80% and 4.60%

Last week was hectic as we had renewed action in the Iran conflict happen during market hours, and the bond market did not like missiles being fired and oil prices heading higher. In the end, oil never really broke out and the week ended under $72. However, the 10-year yield still closed close to my peak forecast. We did bounce off that 4.60% level, but it’s inflation week coming up, so we need to keep an eye on how the bond market reacts to the inflation data, as the market has already priced in a more hawkish Fed today. 

chart visualization

Mortgage spreads

The most positive housing story in 2026 has been mortgage spreads; with all the drama, they have done their job and have kept mortgage rates lower than the previous three years.

chart visualization

Historically, mortgage spreads have ranged from 1.60% to 1.80%. Last week, spreads were at 1.95%, down from 2.01% the week before.

Let’s compare last week’s mortgage rates to where they would have been over the last three years, given the 10-year yield’s current level:

  • If we had the worst mortgage spread levels of 2023, mortgage rates would be 7.80% today, not 6.64%.
  • If we had the worst levels of 2024, mortgage rates would be 7.42% today 
  • If we had the worst levels of 2025, mortgage rates would be 7.23% today.

The week ahead: Inflation week, housing starts, pending home sales and Iran conflict?

It’s inflation week, and since the Fed has gotten hawkish, it will be very interesting to see how the bond market reacts to the inflation now that the 10-year yield is so close to my yearly peak forecast.

We will also get housing starts, builder confidence and pending home sales data from the NAR. I believe the last existing home sales report will be revised slightly higher as well. 

Also, lets see if we have another week of missiles being shot in Iran as the 10-year yield did react negatively to last week’s events.

    

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

After months of deliberation, delays and drama, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act has finally crossed the finish line. 

The legislation, aimed at cutting red tape and making homeownership more attainable, is now the law of the land after President Donald Trump declined to sign or veto the bill before the deadline of midnight Eastern time Saturday.

In a Truth Social post on Friday morning, Trump said he withheld his signature “in protest” of the Senate‘s failure to pass the SAVE America Act, a separate bill targeting voter identification and registration. 

The move threw a last-minute twist into what was a drama-filled final few weeks. Trump abruptly canceled a planned signing ceremony for the bill on June 24, demanding Congress prioritize the SAVE America Act, and later dismissed the housing bill as a “big yawn” by comparison. 

The bipartisan package cleared the Senate 85-5 on June 22 and the House of Representatives 358-32 on June 23. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) sent it back to the White House on June 29. That started a 10-day clock, with Sundays excluded, for Trump to sign, veto or allow the legislation to become law without his signature — which is ultimately what happened.

The dynamic is rare but not unprecedented. In 2016, then-President Barack Obama declined to sign a 10-year renewal of the Iran Sanctions Act, enabling the legislation to become law without taking action. That bill was also overwhelmingly bipartisan, having passed the Senate in a unanimous 99-0 vote.

Recent polling from the American Property Owners Alliance indicates that the general public overwhelmingly backs the main objectives of the ROAD to Housing Act, with 89% of voters voicing their support.

First comprehensive housing package in decades

The final bill includes provisions from more than 60 different bills introduced in Congress, most of which were introduced with bipartisan sponsors. A few of the bills incorporated into the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act include:

  • The HOME Reform Act bolstered the HOME Investment Partnerships program by updating program eligibility, streamlining environmental reviews and expanding flexibility for infrastructure and community land trusts. 
  • The Rural Housing Service Reform Act modernized U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) rural housing programs. Key provisions include the preservation of affordable rentals, the protection of rental assistance, and the strengthening of preservation tools to expand rental and homeownership opportunities in rural communities. 
  • The Housing Supply Frameworks Act would direct the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to produce frameworks to help states and municipalities streamline zoning and regulatory barriers. 

For homebuilders, another key provision is the establishment of $200 million in grant funding, which will reward municipalities that successfully eliminate excessive red tape and burdensome zoning. The removal of the permanent chassis requirement for manufactured homes will also open up opportunities for manufactured homes to compete in densely populated, high-cost markets that have traditionally been reserved for site-built and modular homes. 

Notably, the final version of the bill also omitted prior provisions that build-to-rent (BTR) developers said would largely freeze new investments in BTR projects.

For lenders and mortgage professionals, key provisions include a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loan pilot program for small-dollar mortgages below $100,000 and a requirement that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau study how loan originator compensation rules impact the availability of small-dollar mortgages. 

The ROAD to Housing Act also authorizes a three-year Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery Program and raises FHA multifamily statutory loan limits for the first time in more than 20 years. 

Collaborative advocacy effort

On June 10, more than 1,100 members of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) met with federal lawmakers to advocate for the passage of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. And in May, more than 3,000 advocates responded to call-to-action alerts from the Mortgage Bankers Association during their MAA Action Week to advocate on behalf of the bill. 

These advocacy efforts didn’t take place in isolation. Thousands of housing industry professionals — including Realtors, homebuilders, mortgage and banking professionals, community developers, rental housing providers and more — spent months advocating on behalf of the most comprehensive federal housing bill in decades. 

While most housing leaders acknowledge that there is more work to be done, the industry’s reaction to the bill’s passing has been overwhelmingly positive. 

“This bill becoming law is a genuine milestone — and I don’t use that word lightly,” said Dennis Shea, executive vice president of the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC). “Getting Congress to move on housing supply and affordability has been a long time coming, and the American people made clear they were ready for it.

“But this moment calls for urgency as much as celebration. The hard work of implementation starts now, and there are still many issues to be tackled. BPC will be watching closely, pushing for what’s next, and working hard to increase supply and lower housing costs.”

“The bipartisan 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act is a landmark step toward protecting the American Dream of homeownership,” said Colin Allen, executive director of the American Property Owners Alliance. “By expanding our housing supply and removing barriers to ownership, this legislation will help more Americans achieve their dream, strengthen communities, and build generational wealth.”

“Too many older Americans are struggling to find housing they can afford in the communities they call home,” said Nancy LeaMond, AARP‘s executive vice president and chief advocacy and engagement officer. “AARP has consistently pushed for increasing housing availability and affordability, and with the 21st Century Road to Housing Act now law, more older Americans will be able to age where they want to be — at home.”

Scott Olson, executive director for the Community Home Lenders of America (CHLA), praised the bill’s passage while urging further action.

“Enactment of the Road to Housing bill into law is a major bipartisan accomplishment and great news for American home buyers and renters stressed by housing affordability challenges,” Olson said. “CHLA urges Congress next to move on to action on tax changes to make it easier to access the trillions of dollars in stocks and IRAs to use for a down payment on a home.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Fifteen named plaintiffs allege that Veterans United Home Loans — the nation’s largest lender of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) mortgages — ran an illegal kickback and steering scheme that funneled borrowers into overpriced loans. The accusations were reiterated Thursday in court filings as the plaintiffs opposed a motion to dismiss an amended complaint that was filed by the lender in June.

The case, which is being overseen by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, began in February when the plaintiffs sued Veterans United and Realty Search Solutions LLC, the lender’s real estate arm that does business as Veterans United Realty.

The original complaint accused Veterans United, a private, for-profit corporation, of misleading homebuyers to believe it’s connected to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Court documents said that multiple real estate agents and loan officers say they often lose business because prospective borrowers believe they must obtain financing through Veterans United due to incorrect assumptions that it’s affiliated with the VA.

Missouri-based Veterans United filed a motion to dismiss the original complaint in April. A company spokesperson said at the time that “this meritless lawsuit gets next to nothing right.” The plaintiffs are represented by Hagens Berman, a law firm that has also been involved in litigation against Zillow and Rocket Companies, following settlements tied to real estate brokerage commissions that totaled more than $1 billion.

In May, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, which increased the number of named plaintiffs from three to 15 while doubling the number of claims from four to eight. These included two counts of violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) along with violations of consumer protection laws in Missouri, Illinois, New York, Ohio and Texas.

Last month, Veterans United Home Loans and Veterans United Realty urged the court to dismiss the amended complaint. They characterized the expanded class-action suit as a baseless copycat case driven by anonymous competitor complaints rather than actual consumer harm. The defendants sought dismissal with prejudice, which would preclude the plaintiffs from filing the same claims again.

Opposition to dismissal request

According to Thursday’s court filings, the plaintiffs say the request by Veterans United to dismiss the amended complaint should be denied. They argued that they paid for settlement services covered under RESPA, and that “illegal kickbacks” fostered by the lender and its network of real estate agents inflated the cost of their transactions through higher mortgage rates and fees.

The filings say that Veterans United was founded by three individuals with no military service, yet it deliberately selected a name and branding that allows them to trade on the trust and reputation that veterans associate with the VA. The plaintiffs say the company promotes itself as the nation’s No. 1 VA lender and features a panel of “military advisers” on its website while burying disclaimers about non-affiliation with the VA.

Chad Moller, corporate communications manager for Veterans United Home Loans, issued a statement to HousingWire in which he said the plaintiffs’ attorneys “undermine the foundation of their claims in their brief, abandoning the false assertion in their complaint that Veterans United claimed to be part of the VA.”

Moller pointed to language in the filing that states “Defendants also charge that Plaintiffs did not find any instances in which they ‘held themselves out as the VA’ … but Plaintiffs never claim they expressly did so.”

“We are a private mortgage lender — not a government agency, and we have always been clear about that,” Moller said. “What sets us apart is service: the hands-on guidance and support that gets Veterans and military families, including many first-time buyers, through one of the most important financial decisions of their lives. That commitment shows in hundreds of thousands of reviews from the people we’ve served.”

Steering allegations centered on higher costs

The plaintiffs also reiterated their claims that the companies operate a business model in which agents who receive referrals are required to steer buyers to Veterans United Home Loans for financing. The company uses an app, AgentDash, to ensure agents comply with the steering arrangement, they say. Agents allegedly pay the company about 35% of their commissions — or roughly 1.05% of the home’s sale price — upon closing.

In a documented example provided to the court, the plaintiffs say that a customer was offered a loan with a 6.5% rate but was locked in at 6.75% three days later, even as market rates moved lower. This allegedly cost the borrower more than $6,000 at closing. Testimony given by loan officers say that loans from competitors cost $5,000 to $10,000 less than comparable products from Veterans United.

“Veterans United has a deliberate ‘bait and switch’ policy to lure in clients with enticing terms, only to change the terms as the transaction advances,” the filings state.

The plaintiffs go on to provide more alleged evidence of steering by citing high agent referral rates to a variety of Veterans United loan officers. Three agents cited in the filings used the company to finance more than half of their clients’ transactions. In every instance where Veterans United was chosen, a different LO was utilized.

The plaintiffs say these high referral rates, combined with a rotating group of originators, rule out any legitimate professional relationships and demonstrate widespread steering.

While the amended complaint initially included alleged consumer protection violations in five states, the plaintiffs this week dropped claims in Texas that were time-barred. Additionally, one plaintiff in Ohio was removed from the case due to statutory time restrictions for litigation.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Rechat has launched Testimonials, a new feature that enables real estate agents to collect, manage and use client reviews directly within the Rechat platform.

The feature is integrated alongside contacts, transactions and marketing tools, allowing testimonials to automatically populate marketing materials, listing presentations and campaigns without requiring agents to switch between platforms.

The feature is now available at no additional cost to Rechat users.

In a referral-driven industry, online reputation remains a key factor in winning business. According to the National Association of Realtors’ 2025 Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers, reputation is the most important factor sellers consider when selecting an agent, while 49% of consumers trust online reviews as much as personal recommendations.

Rechat said many agents currently rely on multiple platforms, leaving reviews scattered across third-party websites or stored as screenshots and emails.

“Buyers and sellers have read your reviews before you ever walk in the door. In this business, reputation decides who gets the listing. And now there’s a new buyer in real estate, and it’s not a person. It’s AI,” said Shayan Hamidi, CEO of Rechat. “AI assistants are already deciding which agents get recommended, and they make that call based on your online reputation. Testimonials exists so that when an AI is choosing who works and who doesn’t, your track record is impossible to miss.”

The company said the growing use of AI assistants to research agents and recommend professionals makes online reviews increasingly important, as those systems rely on ratings, testimonials and other digital signals when generating recommendations.

Once a testimonial is collected, it automatically becomes available in Rechat’s Marketing Center, where it can be incorporated into listing presentations, social media content and marketing campaigns.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The American Museum of Natural History is offering a new way to experience Manhattanhenge as the phenomenon makes its final appearance of 2026. The twice-yearly spectacle occurs when the setting sun aligns perfectly with Manhattan’s street grid, creating iconic views and photo opportunities across the borough. To celebrate the cosmic event on Saturday, museum astronomer Jackie Faherty will lead a ticketed 3D presentation using cutting-edge software, followed by a free outdoor viewing experience accompanied by live music.

79th Street block party. Photo © American Museum of Natural History

Coined by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, Manhattanhenge is a play on “Stonehenge,” the prehistoric stone circle in England built to align with the sun’s movement. Manhattan’s street grid does not run perfectly north-south and east-west because the island is rotated roughly 29 degrees clockwise, as 6sqft previously reported.

During the summer solstice, the sun sets about 32 degrees north of true west. In the weeks before and after the solstice, the sun sets at roughly the same angle as Manhattan’s grid, which sits about 29 degrees north of true west.

The phenomenon has become a beloved tradition among New Yorkers, who flock to prime vantage points across the city to take photos and experience the striking display. This year, the half sun and full sun appeared along the street grid on May 28 and 29, respectively.

Manhattanhenge returned as a half sun on Sunday, June 12, at 8:21 p.m. A full sun will be seen on Saturday, July 11, at 8:20 p.m.

Before Saturday’s display, American Museum of Natural History astronomer Jackie Faherty will lead a 3D presentation in the LeFrak Giant-Screen Theater at 7 p.m. exploring the science and history behind Manhattanhenge using the museum’s OpenSpace visualization software. Tickets to the lecture are $20.

Following the presentation, the museum will host an outdoor viewing event featuring live music from the Williamsburg Salsa Orchestra. The event is supported by Manhattan Borough President Brad Hoylman-Sigal.

For soccer fans attending the presentation, the museum will host a free block party starting at 3 p.m. on Saturday that celebrates the sports culture of the five boroughs, including soccer. The event will highlight local traditions while exploring the impact of extreme heat and sunlight on play, performance, and community life around the world.

Inside, the museum will also show FIFA World Cup quarterfinal matches between Norway and England and Argentina and Switzerland. Learn more here.

Those who cannot attend the museum’s event can still experience Manhattanhenge from the city’s major east-west streets, including 14th Street, 23rd Street, 34th Street, 42nd Street, and 57th Street. Other popular viewing spots include the Tudor City Overpass in Manhattan and Hunter’s Point South Park in Long Island City, Queens.

RELATED:

The post AMNH to celebrate Manhattanhenge with free block party this weekend first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

The American Real Estate Association (ARA) is joining the Missouri Association of Realtors and a coalition of organizations opposing Amendments 4 and 5 on Missouri’s Aug. 4 statewide ballot.

Amendment 5 would authorize the state legislature to expand sales taxes to a wide range of goods and services without a public vote.

ARA said the measure could reopen the door to transfer taxes on home sales, impose new taxes on services and lead to combined sales tax rates that opponents warn could exceed 20%.

Results from the legislation would be higher costs for Missouri homeowners, homebuyers and the real estate professionals who serve them, according to ARA.

ARA said Amendment 4 compounds the risk by making it substantially harder for citizens to place initiatives on the ballot — the same process Missouri voters used to enact taxpayer protections in 2010 and 2016.

Taken together, the association said, the two measures would allow lawmakers to raise taxes while limiting the public’s ability to respond. ARA is urging Missourians to vote no on both.

“Missourians didn’t nickname this the ‘Everything Tax’ by accident,” said Jason Haber, c0-founder of ARA. “It would make owning a home more expensive and hand politicians a blank check to keep raising taxes with no vote and no limit. Agents see every day what a home means to a family, and we’re not going to stand by while Jefferson City makes that harder. ARA is proud to stand with Missouri’s Realtors to defeat both.”

According to Mauricio Umansky, co-founder of ARA, “Amendment 4 would make it far harder for citizens to fight back. That is a bad deal for hard-working agents and for every Missouri family trying to buy or keep a home. When Missouri’s Realtors stood up to stop it and asked for a national partner, ARA answered. We urge a no vote on both.”

ARA said its opposition is not a position on income tax policy but a defense of protections Missouri voters have already approved and of their right to decide future tax questions at the ballot box.

“We are thrilled to have the American Real Estate Association stand with us in this critical statewide effort,” Missouri Association of Realtors President Brian Jared added. “I have sold real estate in Missouri my entire career, and I know what Amendment 5 would mean on Main Street. It would raise costs every time someone buys or sells a home, add new taxes on the services families use, and hit seniors on fixed incomes the hardest, all without a vote of the people.”

ARA said it will support the campaign by amplifying the “no on both” message through its national platform and member network — helping mobilize real estate professionals across Missouri and providing financial support to the effort to defeat the measures.

Recent statewide polling has shown broad, bipartisan opposition to both amendments. ARA said its goal is to help ensure Missouri voters understand the measures before the Aug. 4 election.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is selling historic Art Deco bricks from the Lincoln Tunnel’s original retaining walls, built between 1937 and 1945, as they are dismantled to make way for the new Midtown Bus Terminal. The distinctive bricks were used in the walls outside the New York approach of the New Jersey-bound north tube and along Dyer Avenue. As part of a broader effort to promote sustainability and reuse, the agency will list the bricks for $2.25 each, allowing New Yorkers and architecture buffs to own a piece of history from the same era that produced the Empire State Building, Radio City Music Hall, and other Art Deco landmarks.

Courtesy of the Port Authority

The bricks are being removed as part of the Midtown Bus Terminal project. During the first phase of the $10 billion transit hub redevelopment, a new 50,000-square-foot ramp structure is being built to connect directly to and from the Lincoln Tunnel, requiring the disassembly of the existing retaining walls.

Rather than send the bricks to be crushed and disposed of in landfills, the Port Authority hopes to put them “back to work.” The agency says the bricks deserve to be preserved for their historical value, with their distinctive vertical bands and stylized columns offering a glimpse into the golden age of Deco architecture.

Courtesy of the Port Authority

The bricks were designed by an architectural team led by Aymar Embury II, who served as consulting architect to the former Port of New York Authority before collaborating with Robert Moses on the design of hundreds of projects across the five boroughs, including bridges, parks, and college campuses.

According to Orbit, an online marketplace that sells salvaged construction materials, the retaining walls were “patterned with vertical, recessed brick bands with concave ridges and capped with concrete coping.”

Sustainability is also a key motivation behind the preservation effort. The initiative addresses embodied carbon, or the emissions generated throughout the lifecycle of building materials such as steel, concrete, and brick, from production through installation and disposal. Reusing existing materials instead can significantly reduce the environmental cost associated with new construction.

According to the Authority, this approach is known as the “circular economy” model in the construction industry, which the agency is looking to explore for future projects.

The initiative is serving as a test of the circular economy concept, with support from the Transit Tech Lab, a public-private partnership between the Partnership Fund for New York City and regional transit agencies.

With help from Chief Bricks, a specialist in salvaged materials, and Orbit, a web-based marketplace for recirculating construction materials, the agency is recovering as many bricks as possible. The bricks are cleaned, stripped of mortar, and resold.

The Authority is also preserving some bricks for future repairs to the remaining tunnel walls. The rest are being sold to businesses, organizations, and individuals across the region through Orbit, here.

RELATED:

The post Art Deco bricks from original Lincoln Tunnel entrance are for sale first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

One of the most consistent mistakes that buyers’ agents make today is ignoring one of the best sources of affordable housing available to their clients: distressed properties — short sales in particular.

After more than 40 years in the real estate business and involvement in over 25,000 distressed property transactions, I’ve watched agents make this mistake repeatedly. They avoid short sales because they believe the process takes too long, too complicated or may never close. That thinking is outdated and it’s costing both agents and their buyers real opportunities.

Let’s start with what’s actually happening in the market. Every month, more than 40,000 homeowners receive foreclosure notices. Today, more than 2 million American homeowners are behind on their mortgage payments and looking for a way out. Some of those borrowers still have equity. Many do not. For a meaningful number of them, a short sale is the most practical resolution available and often the only one. That represents a substantial pipeline of inventory that most buyer’s agents are just not pursuing.

Instead, agents continue chasing the same listings as everyone else, competing against multiple buyers and investors on the same properties and treating affordability as an unsolvable problem. Meanwhile, some of the most accessible opportunities in the market are going largely unnoticed.

Distressed sellers operate with different motivations than traditional sellers

Most homeowners want top dollar while a distressed homeowner wants a resolution. They’re navigating financial hardship and their sole priority is moving forward, not maximizing proceeds. In a short sale, the seller isn’t receiving any money from the transaction anyway, which means these properties are frequently priced at or below market value to facilitate a faster sale. That can mean all the difference in the world for first-time buyers struggling with affordability.

REO properties can carry similar advantages. Many are priced aggressively from the outset. In certain government-backed and institutional programs, First Look periods restrict investor participation for a defined window of time. Owner-occupant buyers can make offers without competing against cash investors during that period. For a first-time buyer with a conventional or FHA loan, that’s a meaningful structural advantage usually unseen in traditional listings.

For many buyers, though, short sales remain the larger opportunity, primarily because agent perception of them hasn’t kept pace with how the process actually works today.

The short sale process has improved substantially

Lender systems are more automated. Furthermore, documentation requirements are more standardized and communication has improved at nearly every stage. Most importantly, lenders have a sizeable financial incentive to resolve these files efficiently. Foreclosure is expensive. It requires legal action, property preservation, ongoing carrying costs and eventual resale. A successfully negotiated short sale typically reduces the lender’s losses and resolves the situation faster. As a result, lenders are not looking to foreclose when a legitimate short sale can be approved.

When short sales move slowly, it’s usually not because of the lender. If anything, most delays trace directly back to listing agents who submit incomplete files, use outdated financial documentation or simply haven’t made themselves familiar with the process. When the listing agent knows what they’re doing, short sales close considerably faster than most buyer’s agents assume.

One of the more reliable indicators a buyer’s agent can use to evaluate a short sale opportunity is whether the listing agent holds specialized training. A Certified Short Sale Expert, for example, understands the documentation requirements, lender procedures, and timeline expectations well enough to keep a file moving. In some cases, the package has already been submitted to the lender and a preapproved net figure may already be in place before an offer even arrives.

The business case to consider

Agents frequently cite a two-month approval timeline which causes buyers to move away from short sales. Leaving aside that timelines are often shorter than that now, a transaction under contract represents a future commission in the pipeline. The agent is free to continue working with other buyers in the meantime.

The alternative, spending those same two months showing the same buyer additional properties, writing offers that lose in competitive situations and, in all likelihood, renegotiating repeatedly, is not actually more efficient. All too often, agents who build strong businesses tend to think in terms of pipeline, not just speed to close. But it’s impossible to deny that a buyer under contract is an asset. A buyer still shopping is not.

There’s also social value to be had here. As affordability challenges continue across much of the country, distressed properties represent one of the more accessible entry points for first-time buyers who are being priced out of conventional listings. Properly priced short sales and REO properties offer better value and reduced competition, not to mention access to inventory that most buyers and agents never seriously consider. A substantial service gap is addressed with a straightforward solution.

Agents who develop working fluency in REO and short sale transactions will be helping more families become homeowners. That’s not because distressed inventory is always ideal, but because understanding it expands what’s actually available to clients in a constrained market. That fluency will only grow in importance as  delinquency rates continue rising and distressed inventory builds through servicer pipelines.

When an agent continues to ignore short sales because of assumptions formed during a different market environment are, they’re effectively making a decision for their clients. They’re deciding that the complications of an unfamiliar process outweigh the benefits of an affordable, accessible property, and that’s a trade-off worth reconsidering, especially now.

Michael P. Krein is President of the National REO Brokers Association (NRBA) and Managing Partner of House Karma.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

This is part 1 of a 3-part HousingWire special series on the impacts of data centers on housing.

Data centers are creating a split-screen effect in housing markets: They can boost regional demand and land values, while homes near controversial sites may face buyer resistance over noise, water use, construction activity and long-term uncertainty.

That tension is creating a new challenge for real estate professionals, who must assess how data center development could raise regional home values while potentially reducing demand — and prices — for properties closest to the sites.

The sometimes massive facilities generally house computer servers, storage systems and networking equipment that support websites, cloud computing and artificial intelligence. For sellers near proposed or operating data centers, the challenge may be overcoming buyer concerns about noise, water use and future land use.

For buyers, the question is whether they are purchasing ahead of an economic boom — or too close to a project that could make resale harder.

Jerry Allen — a Realtor with eXp Realty and member of the Granbury, Texas, planning and zoning commission — told HousingWire effects are becoming increasingly evident in his market, with nearby homeowners facing significant challenges. “The people that live next to [proposed data center and other local industrial sites] are obviously not very happy about it, and they’re having a hard time [selling] their property,” he said.

Bernadine Anderson, a real estate agent and licensed appraiser working near the same area as Allen, agrees that the impact is already being felt. “There [are] million-dollar homes on two acres that are right next to some proposed data centers,” she said. “They’re trying to sell as fast as they can, but the problem is they’re not able to sell because of the data center issue.”

Building pipeline is striking

The U.S. has thousands of operating data centers, with industry databases putting the count anywhere from roughly 2,000 operating facilities to more than 4,500 listed sites, depending on methodology.

The pipeline is even more striking: Aterio, that provides data on U.S. developments, tracks 774 under-construction and 3,724 announced U.S. data centers, while Pew’s analysis of Data Center Map data found more than 1,500 new data centers in development nationally, with most planned projects shifting into rural areas.

The states to watch are Texas, Virginia, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Utah, Illinois, Arizona, Indiana and Nevada — not just because of current inventory, but because the proposed pipeline is enormous.

Data from CBRE shows vacancy rates in primary data center markets shrinking to 1.4% in the second half of last year.

Researchers said scarce available inventory continues to limit large-scale projects — prompting pre-leasing and off-market activity.

Allen said the sheer number of proposed facilities is alarming residents, as well as potential buyers looking to move to the area. Anderson cited that multiple data centers are planned within a relatively small radius in the area, adding to the uncertainty. “Somebody said nine, but I’ve only heard about four or five,” she said. “They’re all within five miles of each other, and it’s all rural, because that’s where you have all the land. Everybody’s wondering, ‘Why all of a sudden? Why so many? Why do we need them right next to each other?’”

Effect on property values

According to Allen, the arrival of data centers is skewing the entire appraisal process. A data center developer may pay a significant premium for a large tract of land, creating an outlier in the market.

“Do you value [the home] up because the data center is there, or do you value it down because the data center is there?” Allen said. “So, we’re in a state of flux.” Granbury has seen home prices fall 8.2% to $380,000 over the past year, with more than 50% of listings taking price cuts, HousingWire Data shows. However, it’s unclear whether this drop is caused by data centers or is more about current market forces.

On the flip side, Anderson noted that the financial incentives for landowners can be staggering — describing one case where a data center company offered an extraordinary price to reluctant sellers. “They got $360,000 an acre,” Anderson said. “They were older, in their 90s, and they took it. Acreage in that area was normally going for about $25,000. They’re offering ungodly amounts of money for this land.”

Allen shared an example of a friend who was offered a contract for his land near a data center development. The premium offered was hard to believe. “The cash price to buy the place was like $16 million for this tract,” he said. “It probably would have been around $3 million if not for the data center. We’re talking a major difference in money.”

The buyer also paid half a million dollars annually for a four-year option on the property — just to keep the land off the market, according to Allen.

“That part is really screwing us up on real estate, because it’s skewing the appraisal values on land,” he said. “The appraisal industry hasn’t really caught up with that yet.”

Studies measuring the effect on property values have brought back mixed results.

University of Rochester research found data center development has little measurable effect on nearby home prices — while a separate George Mason University-led study found new data centers slowed local home-price growth.

Fears unfounded, so far

While data center developments in Texas have sparked fears of plummeting property values and mass seller exodus, one Ohio Realtor says the impact in her market is more nuanced — rooted in resident distrust rather than immediate sales disruption.

Donna Deaton, a real estate agent with REMAX Victory + Affiliates in the greater Cincinnati area, said she has not seen clients abandon home purchases due to a planned data center.

Over the past year, HousingWire Data shows the Cincinnati-Middletown market holding strong — with median list prices rebounding to $399,000. Trenton currently sits at $282,500.

“So far, no one has said, ‘Oh, I’m not going to move there because they’re getting a data center,’” she said. Instead, Deaton says the most vocal concerns come from existing residents in the area, particularly in Trenton, where a significant data center project is planned.

Deaton also said many residents felt blindsided by the project, though she suggested a lack of local engagement may have contributed.

“The construction is a little bit of a concern, but they’re building it in an industrial area. It’s land that’s already zoned for industrial, so it’s not like they’re going into the neighborhood to build it. Now, is it close to homes? Yes, because [Trenton] is a smaller area.”

Deaton acknowledged the possibility of land price escalation similar to what Allen and Anderson reported in Texas.

“I have not heard that yet, but I wouldn’t be surprised,” she said. “The further out we go, we’re almost locked in with our area for farmland. We don’t have a whole lot of it left. You have to go out to the more farmland counties.”

Room for optimism?

While data center developments have sparked anxiety in some markets, one Florida real estate team leader views the industry’s growing interest in Polk County as a positive signal for the region’s economic future.

Jen Lay — team leader of eXp Realty-affiliated The Lay Group in Lakeland — said she sees the proposed data center projects as part of a broader economic transformation. “Real estate has always been about the job growth,” she said. “One large employer comes in, then they create demand and then that brings more people to the area.”

Lay said she has not yet had a buyer decline a home purchase due to data center concerns.”I haven’t had any buyer go, ‘No, I don’t want to live there because of a data center,’” she said. “But I’m sure it’ll come.”

Lakeland sits in a highly contested region for data centers due to its strategic position between Tampa and Orlando. While some established data center facilities operate in the area, a massive proposed development named “Project Swan” recently sparked intense debate and a proposed one-year development moratorium.

Lay acknowledged that water and infrastructure are legitimate concerns.

“Water is a big problem in Polk County,” she said. “If they can do [these projects] responsibly, then I believe it’s going to strengthen the housing demand over the next decade. I don’t think one project alone is going to change home values overnight. Real estate responds to sustainability — job growth, wage growth and population growth. We literally just had Orlando Health open their hospital two weeks ago in Lakeland. We don’t know what the impacts of that are going to be yet.

HousingWire data supports Lay’s assessment. Lakeland-Winter Haven, Florida, remains a relatively balanced market — with prices hovering near $350,000 and little momentum in either direction over the past 12 months.

“This [data center] project has the potential to contribute to those trends, but it’s just one tiny piece of, in my opinion, a larger economic future.”

For real estate professionals navigating client concerns about data centers, Lay recommends encouraging civic engagement. “What I love is that we do have the option to hold our city leaders accountable,” she said. “Are the residents asking the right questions about how they’re tapping into the aquifer, and how we’ll get water? I don’t know, but they need to ask.”

Broader economic impact

While community backlash against data centers has dominated headlines, the economic impact on local housing markets follows a predictable pattern that real estate agents can navigate, according to Selma Hepp, chief economist at Cotality.

“The impact has been something similar to what we’ve experienced, sort of like energy booms, or where there’s an energy town that experiences a demand shock,” Hepp said. “They don’t necessarily have the housing infrastructure, so the influx of the workers and the sheer number of workers is what makes the impact so great on these markets.”

Data centers often require hundreds or even thousands of construction workers during the building phase — creating intense short-term demand for housing.

“The wages of these employees tend to be a little bit higher — engineering facilities, electrical positions that are higher paying — so they have more income to work with, and that adds to the pressure on rents,” Hepp said.

The pattern is consistent; rents increase first, followed by home prices if the economic impact proves lasting, she added.

Hepp pointed to Reno, Nevada, as an example where data center development has created more permanent housing demand. Abilene, Texas, was also cited, where Hepp said data center construction contributed to rents going up 33% year-over-year.

In northern Virginia’s “data center alley,” developers are competing directly with new housing construction for available land, putting significant pressure on the cost of land, Hepp added.

Still, she has not seen consistent research showing negative impacts on home prices from data centers. “If [a homebuyer] is not in the midst of this volatility that’s happening during the construction, if you come in before, you’re more likely to benefit from it,” she said. “That’s because prices are likely to go up. If you’re on the back end, the prices have already gone up, so they’re likely to stay where they are.”

Data centers are creating a real estate tale of two neighborhoods; one seller may face buyer concerns about noise, traffic, utility costs and disruption, while another watches land values climb or rents rise as investment pours in.

A nearby homeowner could see challenges at resale, while a landowner may receive multimillion-dollar offers.

For agents, these projects are becoming a new map marker — a local factor that can reshape demand, pricing and the future of surrounding communities.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

With a major policy win at hand, one of America’s most promising housing affordability solutions hidden in plain sight may get the close-up moment its stakeholders have fought for decades to earn.

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act – on a white-knuckle countdown to midnight before going into law as expected – includes a provision that would eliminate a 1974 mandate that required manufactured homes to be built on a permanent steel chassis. 

Removing the steel chassis could cut costs, and bend affordability curves favorably toward would-be homeowners. But industry stakeholders say the greater opportunity lies in the new measure’s enabling larger, more innovative designs that can reach new customers, penetrate new urban infill and close-in markets and gain broader acceptance among residents and local officials.

Manufactured housing, which costs 50% less per square foot than traditional site-built homes, according to the Manufactured Housing Institute, provides one of the most attainable forms of housing in the United States. There are 7.2 million occupied manufactured homes in the U.S., representing nearly 5.5% of the nation’s occupied housing stock.

However, the number of new manufactured home shipments is way down from its peak, five decades ago. In 2025, there were just over 100,000 new manufactured home shipments. In 1998, new shipments were about 373,000 homes, and in the early 1970s, that figure peaked at roughly 600,000 homes annually.

Outdated perceptions and provisions, such as the permanent chassis requirement, have thwarted the industry, but Lesli Gooch, CEO at the Manufactured Housing Institute, told HousingWire TBD that the sector’s producers have been improving and innovating manufactured home building envelopes and systems for years in a bid to overcome past stigmas and earn back some of that lost ground.

Removal of the chassis will accelerate that innovation, a necessary step towards broader acceptance and adoption. The chassis has become emblematic of chronic reputational challenges that have virtually relegated manufactured housing to rural outlying areas and trailer park communities. This rule change could be one of several safety, aesthetic and land-planning advances that encourage more local municipal stakeholders to welcome manufactured homes as an organic part of neighborhood housing stock.

“Instead of forcing everyone to accept us, let’s get to a point where they’re saying ‘yes, please come’ and ‘yeah, we need more of that’, Gooch said. 

Opportunities for new product types

Manufactured homes must comply with HUD code, which offers regulatory efficiency and structural quality and safety oversight. Unlike traditional site-built housing that may require approvals from multiple jurisdictions, manufactured homes go through a centralized HUD oversight process, with inspections and quality checks throughout factory production.

The removal of the permanent chassis requirement would complement earlier policy decisions from HUD that have gradually expanded manufactured housing options. These moves include a decision to enable more townhouse-style designs by permitting zero-lot-line allowances, and a 2024 rule to allow duplex homes and multifamily buildings with up to four units. 

More recently, HUD published a proposed rule to allow upper-level sections of multi-story manufactured housing to be transported and assembled without a permanent chassis. Industry insiders say that this rule would make building multi-story manufactured homes a viable new product and business opportunity. 

All of these changes open up channels for manufacturers to design a wider array of products. Removing the ground-floor chassis will add to that momentum. Manufacturers, for example, will have the ability to go vertical and build higher-density housing.

“When you remove the chassis, you’re going to get a lot more options for elevations and for size. They will be brought in by a crane, or there are other different ways of bringing those houses in. Our industry is innovative, and we’re excited about expanding that range,” Gooch said. 

Opportunities to dispel outdated misconceptions

The chassis removal, in addition to enabling a wider array of product types, will further eliminate the reputational and aesthetic lines that separate manufactured homes from traditional site-built housing, manufactured housing advocates say. 

“I think it will change the perception of people automatically associating them with being movable,” said Arica Young, Director, Housing Access and Affordability at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 

That misconception, Young explained, extends to some lenders and bankers, many of whom still assume the homes can simply be transported away, even though that’s not how they function once installed. Eliminating the permanent chassis requirement could allow manufactured homes to be classified as real property, giving buyers access to traditional 30-year and government-backed mortgages instead of higher-cost chattel loans.

Removing the chassis will also allow for homes with more curb appeal, more easily blending into established communities. The design flexibility could mean that manufactured homes will begin to look far more similar to site-built homes from traditional homebuilders. 

“I think it also changes the look of the homes, frankly. It gives them a lower profile, it brings them even closer to looking like a site-built home without having to do additional touches in terms of architectural details to mask the fact that it’s raised a little bit higher. I think aesthetically it makes it easier for them to blend into existing communities,” Young said. “It kind of helps dispel some of the myths about what these homes are, and their actual ability to be moved.”

The end of the chassis mandate could also signal an inflection on improved performance of manufactured homes. 

“Removing the steel frame and placing the house on the foundation could allow for better and quieter heating and air conditioning systems while boosting aesthetic appeal,” said Sam Landy, President at UMH Properties. 

Given the potential, the innovation potential spurred by the chassis removal could help manufactured housing improve its image. Once more people see the aesthetic appeal and higher performance of newer manufactured homes, some old misconceptions could go by the wayside. While new manufactured housing communities are much higher-quality than the trailer park communities of old, this perception persists in the minds of some residents and lawmakers. 

Gooch pointed to CrossMod homes, which are built to HUD standards but designed to resemble site-built homes, as evidence that developers are already adopting more advanced manufactured housing products.

“There is some stigma against our traditional manufactured home. Zoning is a challenge. A lot of times, that elevation [required by the chassis] is really what keeps us out, even though they’re quality, brand-new homes that those entry-level buyers would embrace over the other options they have,” Gooch explained. “But by removing the chassis, you’re overcoming some of that stigma and those hurdles. People will say, ‘Oh, yeah, we want more of that in our neighborhood,’ or ‘That works.’”

Opportunities for new reach 

With the opportunity to build larger, higher-density homes with more aesthetic appeal, manufacturers could gain access to market opportunities that were previously out of reach. Building on HUD’s previous changes allowing townhome-style homes, duplexes and small multifamily properties, manufactured housing could expand into higher-cost markets, major metropolitan areas and infill sites in established suburban and urban communities.

“People are looking to manufactured housing for infill development in cities. You’re not going to need a chassis there at the end of the day. It’s going to be a fee simple project or a developed community that may have a homeowners association,” Young explained. “We’re already seeing a lot of infill projects that are happening right now with manufactured housing the way it is. I think it’s just going to open that up more.”

During a Q4 2025 earnings call last year, Cavco Industries’ President and CEO, William Boor, also noted the market opportunity that the chassis removal provides. 

“If you think about those kinds of opportunities, you start to see the opportunity for product innovation for urban and suburban markets, and that opens up a whole new market opportunity for this industry,” Boor said during the call. 

The opportunity extends beyond expanding manufactured housing’s geographic footprint. With the ability to build better and larger homes, manufacturers could also broaden their customer base and compete more directly with traditional homebuilders.

“Many families have more than three children. When you have two stories, our residents benefit from much more space, including having four bedrooms or even six bedrooms. This could really accommodate larger families, which are increasingly common,” Landy said. 

Then, of course, there are zoning regulations. While some municipalities continue to stigmatize manufactured housing, local lawmakers have increasingly loosened zoning laws to allow manufactured housing as the industry has innovated. Removing the chassis will only make it more accepted. 

“A lot of those zoning regulations are there because of biases against the old mobile homes. I think the more we can show that these homes are regular houses, the more it facilitates the removal of those barriers,” Young explained. 

Opportunities for affordability 

Many headlines place the cost-saving measures of removing the chassis between $5,000 and $10,000 per home. While that sounds promising, Young cautioned against broad claims about these cost savings, noting that estimates vary widely. She added that any savings would also depend on whether homes are purchased individually or in bulk, with developers buying dozens or hundreds of homes potentially seeing different economics. As a result, quantifying the savings and the extent to which consumers will benefit can be tricky.

Boor, in a Q4 2026 earnings call in May, framed the chassis removal as more of an innovation opportunity as opposed to a cost-cutting measure. 

“I haven’t really thought about chassis as much as a cost-driven thing as I think about it as an innovation-driven thing,” he said. 

Gooch argued that the biggest affordability impact of removing the chassis requirement is not necessarily the direct cost savings from eliminating the steel chassis. Instead, it lies in the ability to expand the supply of attainable homes for entry-level buyers to more communities and more customers. 

Manufactured housing already provides one of the most attainable paths to homeownership. Greater design flexibility and faster delivery could help address the shortage of homes available to the “missing middle, she argued. 

“We’re providing the American Dream with a brand new house, with all of the resilience and quality features that today’s consumers want, at price points within reach,” Gooch said. “We’re excited because we think that, with the chassis removal, it really opens up that opportunity for more individuals.”

Where the permanent chassis might remain

The big benefit of removing the permanent chassis requirement is that it is only optional. Manufacturers, in many cases, will still deliver homes with a permanent chassis.

Both Gooch and Landy argued that the most affordable manufactured homes will probably still be the single-section home on a chassis. 

Additionally, chassis-built homes will likely remain common for replacement homes in manufactured housing communities and in rural or land-lease markets, where minimizing costs and simplifying installation are key considerations.

How quickly can the industry adapt?

Young argued that the manufactured housing industry is already preparing for the changes that the chassis removal will bring. HUD is evaluating what updates to the building code would be needed, and engineers at larger manufacturers are doing the same. While the exact timeline is uncertain, new designs could likely be introduced within a year or two, if not sooner, because much of the groundwork is already underway.

Boor, on a recent earnings call, said that Cavco Industries’ factories are ready to immediately move forward with chassis-free designs when they are permitted to. 

“When you make a modular home, you’re generally making it to have a removable chassis. Our factories that do modular, from an engineering and factory perspective, are in a position to make HUD-code homes without a chassis as soon as that law gets changed, the wording gets changed and the definition, and as soon as states kind of conform to it,” he said. 

Gooch explained that the manufactured housing industry itself is ready to adapt to the policy change, but the timeline will largely depend on the regulatory process rather than the manufacturers themselves. HUD must first update the manufactured housing code through its advisory committee process, public comment period and final rulemaking, and states will also need to update laws governing manufactured housing. Once those steps are complete and HUD approves new home designs, manufacturers can begin producing homes that comply with the updated requirements.

Before manufacturers can move forward with new chassis-free designs, they will need to wait for the HUD code to be updated and for the regulatory framework to be established. Once that happens, they will submit their designs for review and approval by HUD-approved third-party inspection agencies. After the designs are approved, manufacturers can begin producing the homes, with those agencies continuing to oversee construction through factory inspections and quality assurance processes.

“This doesn’t just happen. There are steps, and as the industry trade association, we’ve been trying to do what we can to make those steps move as quickly as possible,” Gooch said. 

“I think the industry is ready,” she added. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Existing home sales came out yesterday showing slight year-over-year growth, but the headlines were all about home prices at an all-time high. However, most people weren’t focused on the fact that wages have been outpacing home prices for some time now, which is a positive.

Yesterday I went on Yahoo Finance to talk about how the housing market is getting healthier, and today’s episode of the HousingWire Daily podcas dives into that conversation as well. So lets talk about slower price growth being a positive for affordability.

History of home prices

It’s very normal for home prices to rise. In fact, if I exclude 2007-2011, home prices have not fallen by even 1% since 1942. In 1990, we were down 0.7%, and in 1991, we were down 0.02%.

However, as you can see below, we have had many years when real home prices fell, meaning the growth rate of prices is lower than the growth rate of inflation. This year is a good example of this, where the growth rate of prices is running below the growth rate of inflation and wage growth.

For example, assume home prices are up 1% this year, but wage growth is running at 3.5% and inflation is running at 3% — this kind of year helps with affordability over time. The fact that inflation is higher than home-price growth shows that home-price growth is actually soft this year. 

I am very excited about this data because the housing market is no longer savagely unhealthy, but healthy again. My 2025 price forecast was for 1.77%; we ended the year at 1.3%. Wages rose faster than home prices. So far this year, home prices are performing a smidge better than I forecast, which was at a -0.62%, but wages are still outpacing them. These facts are a positive for the housing market, not a negative.

Housing inventory

Even though inventory fell month-to-month and we aren’t back to normal inventory levels, per the NAR data, inventory is at levels I would never describe as low. My rule of thumb has been simple: as long as we have 1.52 million -1.93 million active inventory with over four months’ supply, we are good, and we can see that to be the case in 2025 and 2026.

Now, inventory is very seasonal, and in a few months it will see its traditional seasonal decline, but price growth cooling down because of this is a positive, not a negative. Normal inventory is between 2-2.5 million, and in yesterday’s report we stood at 1.56 million with 4.6 months of supply. For context, the peak in 2007 was 4 million. More supply means more choices for buyers, and sellers can’t dictate the terms as much, which slows down price growth and increases affordability. 

chart visualization

Conclusion

Home-price growth was 1.8% in the last existing home sales report, a bit firmer than my forecast for 2026, but still lower than wage growth, which is running at 3.5%. Over time, as long as this type of price growth continues, with wage growth outpacing it, it’s a huge plus.

Just remember how unhealthy home-price growth was in 2020, at 10%, and in 2021, at 19%. Now price growth below wage growth is just what the housing doctor ordered for this marketplace.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, after months of deliberation and delays, has encountered yet another curveball.

On Friday morning, President Donald Trump confirmed in a Truth Social post that he won’t sign the legislation, although he didn’t say that he would veto it. Assuming that Trump doesn’t veto or sign the bill today, it is set to automatically go into law at midnight Eastern time, a result that many housing stakeholders expect.

If Trump does issue a veto, Congress could have the votes to override it, but it would cause further delays.

“I will not sign the Housing Bill, which has been fully approved by Congress and sent to the White House, in PROTEST over the fact that the United States Senate is not capable of passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT…”, Trump said in the post.

The news comes after Trump delayed a signing ceremony for the bill on June 24, instead insisting that Congress first pass the SAVE America Act, a bill aimed at strengthening voter identification and registration requirements. In the days after the cancellation, Trump downplayed the significance of the bill, calling it a “big yawn” in comparison to the SAVE America Act. 

Mike Johnson (R-La.), the speaker of the House of Representatives, formally sent the bipartisan housing package — which passed the House on June 23 by a margin of 358-32 — back to the White House on June 29. That triggered a 10-day deadline for Trump to sign the bill, veto it or allow it to become law without his signature. With Sundays excluded, the countdown will end at midnight Saturday after Friday’s deadline passes.

Housing industry stakeholders, who have almost unanimously backed the legislation, are eagerly awaiting its passage.

“The bipartisan 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act is a landmark step toward protecting the American Dream of homeownership. By expanding our housing supply and removing barriers to ownership, this legislation will help more Americans achieve their dream, strengthen communities and build generational wealth,” said Colin Allen, executive director of the American Property Owners Alliance. 

Build-to-rent lifeline

The housing package effectively bans institutional investors that already own 350 or more single-family homes from purchasing additional single-family properties. But the final version removed a pair of controversial provisions that largely froze new investments into build-to-rent (BTR) projects. 

One of the excluded provisions, which was included in a previous Senate version of the bill, would have included an institutional investor ban without carve-outs for BTR communities. Another would have mandated that new BTR communities be sold to individual homeowners within seven years of completion.

Both proposals, which were ultimately excluded from the final bill, would have significantly undermined the ability of BTR developers to generate returns on their investments.

The final text aligns with Trump’s executive order from January aimed at limiting institutional homebuying, while eliminating the broader restrictions on build-to-rent that raised significant concerns and opposition among housing industry stakeholders.

Streamlining homebuilding

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act aims to streamline the development of housing, primarily by cutting red tape. 

For example, the bill would exempt new categories of relatively small-scale development under the HOME program from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The legislation would also limit duplicative environmental reviews in the HOME program and make other adjustments to reduce red tape associated with NEPA reviews. 

Another provision aimed at removing the permanent chassis requirement from manufactured homes has generated a lot of buzz in the industry. Manufactured housing is an attainable source of housing for millions of Americans, but it is primarily located in rural areas far from city centers. Removing the chassis rule could lower costs while expanding design flexibility, unlocking new opportunities for manufactured housing in higher-cost, infill and urban markets.

Shawn King, executive vice president of national sales and co-founder of Arrive Home, called the bill “the most consequential piece of manufactured housing policy in decades.”

“In the past, federal rules have forced builders to permanently attach a steel chassis to every manufactured home, even though fewer than 7% of these homes are ever moved after they’re installed,” King said. “That requirement alone has been adding $5,000 to $10,000 to the cost of every single home for no real benefit to the homeowner.

“Eliminating it doesn’t just lower the price tag; it opens the door to basements, multi-story designs and layouts that let manufactured homes fit naturally into neighborhoods instead of standing apart from them,” King added.

The legislation also creates grant programs to help state, local and tribal governments update regulatory processes and improve permitting capacity. Another grant program will help communities adopt pre-reviewed building plans that can streamline approvals.

The bill additionally simplifies approvals for multifamily buildings, expands affordable housing financing, supports the conversion of vacant commercial properties into housing, and improves access to developable land through the establishment of a database that enables better tracking of publicly owned land. 

“The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act will help expand the nation’s housing supply by reducing regulatory barriers and encouraging local governments to reform zoning and land-use policies that have limited home building,” Bill Owens, the chairman of the National Association of Home Builders, said in a statement.

Mortgage and financing provisions

The bill includes several provisions that directly affect the mortgage industry and housing financing.

Key provisions include a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loan pilot program for small-dollar mortgages below $100,000, along with a requirement that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issue a report to Congress to study how loan originator compensation rules affect the availability of small-dollar mortgages. 

Additionally, the housing package raises FHA multifamily statutory loan limits for the first time since 2003 and authorizes a three-year Community Development Block Grant–Disaster Recovery program. 

Another key provision aims to bolster the appraiser workforce by expanding training programs and providing grant funding to attract new talent.  

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

An analysis published Friday by the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) suggests that using a single randomly selected credit bureau score, rather than the current multiscore “decisioning” method, would have little effect on loan pricing or guarantee fee revenue for the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs).

The MBA examined nearly 105,000 mortgage applications from the first half of 2025 using Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) McDash loan application data.

Researchers found that a randomly selected credit score landed in the same Fannie Mae loan-level price adjustment (LLPA) bucket as the current decisioning score roughly two-thirds of the time, with about 90% of scores falling within one pricing bucket above or below the decisioning score.

The findings come as the mortgage industry continues to debate changes to credit scoring requirements, including proposals to move away from the longstanding practice of requiring multiple credit bureau scores for mortgage underwriting.

For the analysis, the MBA used the methodology outlined in Fannie Mae’s Selling Guide to calculate decisioning credit scores. When three borrower credit scores were available, researchers used the middle score; when two scores were available, they used the lower score; and when only one score was reported, that score became the decisioning score.

The sample excluded loans with co-borrowers and applications containing credit scores below 500.

Researchers then simulated a single-file approach by randomly selecting one available bureau score for each application and comparing its corresponding LLPA pricing bucket with the decisioning score.

Among borrowers with decisioning credit scores between 700 and 719, nearly 68% of randomly selected scores fell into the same pricing bucket, while about 91% landed either in the same bucket or one bucket higher or lower. The MBA said upward and downward movements between adjacent pricing buckets occurred at roughly equal rates, indicating little net change in LLPA revenue.

The association said these patterns remained consistent across the entire LLPA matrix, leading it to conclude that moving to a single credit file would likely have little impact on either mortgage credit risk or loan-level price adjustment revenue.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Legal battling between Zillow, Compass and Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) continued Thursday with all parties filing competing post-hearing briefs — Zillow alleging an “unlawful conspiracy” to cut off its access to Chicagoland listing data while defendants Compass and MRED counter that the company’s harm is “self-inflicted.”

The filings come after a two-day hearing earlier this week on Zillow’s motion for a preliminary injunction that would prevent MRED from suspending its listing data feeds to the online portal.

Judge John Tharp Jr. is now weighing whether to grant the injunction, with replies to the new briefs due Monday.

In a 48-page supplemental brief, Zillow argued that MRED and Compass International Holdings worked “in lockstep” to block its Listing Access Standards, which discourage private listing networks that hide properties from public view.

Zillow’s brief accuses MRED — working with Compass — of revising its display rules to target Zillow’s listing standards and create a pretext for terminating its feed access.

It’s also alleged that defendants terminated or discouraged Zillow’s direct broker feeds, eliminating its only alternative source of Chicagoland listings.

Finally, Zillow claimed that MRED and Compass formed an alliance through which Compass “laundered its failed private exclusive listings through MRED, triggering an ostensible violation of MRED’s rules to justify termination of Zillow’s feed access.”

Attorneys for Zillow pointed to an October 2025 email from Compass CEO Robert Reffkin to multiple MLSs urging them to “discipline” Zillow by terminating its feed access if its standards were not “immediately repealed.”

Zillow also said that Compass terminated direct broker feed agreements nationwide and that MRED warned its members against providing Zillow with direct feeds.

The company argued that losing access to MRED’s feeds — which cover nearly all Chicagoland listings — would cause irreparable harm by triggering a “downward spiral” of lost audience and revenue that would be impossible to quantify.

“If Zillow’s listing supply is reduced to less than 50% in Chicagoland, that would directly undermine Zillow’s brand promise and audience-driven business model in ways that are difficult, if not impossible, to quantify,” the brief states.

Defendants reject conspiracy claims

In their joint 40-page brief, MRED and Compass painted a dramatically different picture — arguing that Zillow’s ban on listings previously marketed outside the MLS is the true anticompetitive conduct.

“Zillow is not entitled to the extraordinary relief it seeks because any harm, if it exists at all, is self-inflicted,” the defendants wrote. “If Zillow wants MRED’s feed, the ‘lifeblood’ of its business that it receives virtually for free, all Zillow has to do is not subjectively ban listings. It is as simple as that.”

Compass and MRED argued that Zillow’s Listing Access Standards policy, announced in April 2025, blocks listings from appearing on Zillow’s website if they were previously marketed outside the MLS — a policy designed to discourage brokers from using private listing networks and “coming soon” marketing strategies.

“Zillow pretends it favors ‘transparency,’ but in truth its ban achieves the opposite,” the brief stated. “Zillow only bans listings that were publicly marketed off-MLS and, as such, it encourages listings to be truly secret; it knowingly and deliberately withholds the fact that a home is for sale from its users.”

Defendants also argued that private listings are procompetitive and that MRED’s rules requiring “objective criteria” for listing filters are neutral and lawful.

They also contended that Compass and MRED each acted independently, not as part of any conspiracy.

“The evidence shows that neither Defendant wanted Zillow’s data feeds permanently suspended,” the brief stated. “Defendants simply wanted Zillow to stop banning and misrepresenting listings.”

Long-running dispute over listing access

Litigation traces back to Zillow’s broader antitrust lawsuit alleging that MRED and Compass conspired to cut off the listing portal’s access to the Chicagoland MLS listing feed.

The preliminary injunction motion requires Zillow to show it would suffer irreparable harm without the injunction and that it is likely to prevail at trial.

MRED suspended Zillow’s feed access on May 20, but the suspension lasted only two days after the court issued a temporary restraining order restoring access.

Dispute centers on Zillow’s Listing Access Standards, which ban listings from its platform if they are not available for display on IDX or VOW feed-powered websites within one business day of the property being publicly marketed.

That policy impacts listings that Compass markets as private exclusives before taking them public via the MLS.

Zillow has argued that its policy is pro-competitive and good for consumers because it promotes transparency, while MRED’s enforcement of its display rules hurts consumers and protects Compass from competition.

MRED has maintained that its rules are neutral and derive from a 2008 settlement between the Department of Justice and the National Association of Realtors that prevented MLSs from selectively hiding listings from consumer-facing portals.

It remains unclear how long the court will take to rule on the motions.

This article was written by Jonathan Delozier and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation. It was reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

West Capital Lending (WCL) is pushing back against loanDepot‘s attempt to dismiss a lawsuit that accuses the lender of using an illegal compensation structure to gain an unfair competitive advantage in the mortgage market.

In an opposition brief filed June 18 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, WCL argued that its complaint sufficiently alleges loanDepot violated the Truth in Lending Act (TILA)’s loan originator compensation rule by tying production managers’ compensation to the pricing terms offered to borrowers.

TILA’s application to production managers

WCL filed the lawsuit in March, alleging loanDepot’s consumer direct division violated the Truth in Lending Act’s loan originator compensation rule by tying production managers’ compensation to loan profitability and pricing concessions. WCL argues the rule applies to production managers because they negotiated loan terms with borrowers, despite also serving in supervisory roles.

The complaint alleges loanDepot used the compensation structure to gain pricing flexibility unavailable to compliant lenders. This allowed it to selectively undercut competitors — including WCL — while reducing managers’ compensation, causing WCL to lose customers, market share and revenue.

To support its claims, WCL cited declarations from former loanDepot production managers and executives who said managers regularly negotiated rates and fees with borrowers, and that their pay decreased when they approved pricing concessions.

The filing also points to an internal compensation formula that allegedly reduced production managers’ bonuses based on the number of pricing exceptions granted to borrowers. WCL argues the policy directly linked compensation to loan terms in violation of Regulation Z.

WCL further alleges former employees were instructed to match or beat offers from WCL regardless of profitability. According to the declarations, loanDepot was willing to lose money on individual loans to prevent borrowers from choosing the rival lender, using profits from higher-priced loans and reduced manager compensation to subsidize the discounts.

The company also argues it has standing to pursue claims under California‘s Unfair Competition Law because it allegedly lost customers, market share and revenue as a result of the practices. It contends that California law allows unfair competition claims to be based on alleged TILA violations, even though TILA itself does not provide competitors with a private right of action.

Legal battle on multiple fronts

WCL is asking the court to deny loanDepot’s motion to dismiss or, alternatively, allow it to amend its complaint if the court identifies any pleading deficiencies. The case remains pending, and neither WCL nor loanDepot returned HousingWire‘s requests for comment at the time of publication.

The suit isn’t the first time WCL and loanDepot have gone toe to toe in the courtroom.

In October 2025, loanDepot accused WCL and its founders of poaching hundreds of loan officers, misappropriating trade secrets and customer data, and violating LO compensation and labor laws. That case is still ongoing.

The lender also alleged that WCL improperly classified hundreds of loan officers as independent contractors and compensated them through revenue-sharing arrangements that gave the brokerage an unfair competitive advantage. WCL has denied the allegations.

WCL also faces a separate but similar lawsuit filed in June 2025 by consumer-direct lender Griffin Funding. That suit alleges several former LOs diverted company leads and customers after leaving for WCL. Griffin alleges the former employees misappropriated trade secrets and caused more than $3.7 million in lost revenue, claiming that WCL benefited from the alleged misconduct.

This article was written by Sarah Wolak and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Let me ask you something. How much time do you spend in your car each week?

If you’re like most real estate agents, the answer is a lot. Showings, appointments, closings, more appointments — this business keeps you moving. Here’s what I want you to consider: that drive time is either working for you or it’s being wasted. Right now, for most agents, it’s being wasted.

Here’s the math. Even a modest 30 minutes each way adds up to roughly five hours a week. Over a year? We’re talking several full work weeks. Can you imagine knowingly throwing several weeks of your career out the window? Of course not. But that’s exactly what’s happening when you treat your windshield time as nothing more than getting from Point A to Point B.

So, what do you do with it instead?

Feed your mind something that builds you. Load up a training program, an audiobook on negotiation, a coaching session. Put something in your ears that makes you sharper. In this business, nobody is handing you continuing education after you get your license. That gap between the agent who keeps growing and the one who plateaus? A lot of it comes down to self-directed learning. Your car is a rolling classroom. Start treating it like one.

Focus on the positive. I’ve always said, be informed, not infected. There’s a real performance cost to spending your most focused hours absorbing stress that isn’t even yours. Stay aware of what’s happening, absolutely. But don’t let your drive become an hour of other people’s negativity draining the life right out of you.

Use the quiet for actual thinking. Turn everything off and be present with yourself. Think through your pipeline, your clients, where you want to take your business. The car is one of the rare places where nobody can interrupt you — no inbox, no ringing phone. That’s gold.

Dictate while the ideas are hot. When a great thought hits you, grab your phone and talk it out. Have a client email you’ve been putting off? A campaign idea bouncing around in your head? Dictate it. When you get back to your desk, hand it to an AI and clean it up into a polished draft. You did the hard part — the thinking — in time that would’ve evaporated otherwise.

Make it stick

Here’s the thing about good intentions: they fade without structure. Decide in advance what each type of trip is for. Queue up your training material. Check in with yourself periodically — what did you actually learn this week? What did you capture?

The goal is to turn a passive habit into an active system. Because the time is already being spent either way. The only question is whether it’s working for you.

I’ll leave you with this: two real estate professionals can log the exact same miles every week, serve similar markets, and look identical on paper. But over a few years, one of them emerges sharper, better prepared, and more current — and the other is right where they started. The difference often comes down to what happened inside that car.

The time is already yours. Cash it in.

Darryl Davis, CSP, is a real estate coach, speaker, and bestselling author with more than 40 years in the industry. Through his POWER AGENT® Coaching Program, he helps real estate professionals build careers and lives worth smiling about. Learn more at DarrylSpeaks.com.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

On a tree-shaded West Village street, this elegant co-op at 104 Bedford Street takes pre-war bones and out-of-the-box angles and adds sophisticated interiors that landed it in the pages of Architectural Digest. Asking $2.75 million, the home’s highlights include two wood-burning fireplaces, a cozy dining nook, generous closets, and a guest room optimized with a built-in bed.

Through an arched entryway wrapped in Pierre Frey wallpaper, the lush living room is light-filled and layered with lush texture and color. A wood-burning fireplace is set within a black marble hearth.

The kitchen’s cabinetry wears a deep slate blue, punctuated by knobs and pulls of burnished brass. Top-of-the-line appliances include a Viking range and a Miele dishwasher and refrigerator. Framed by a tall archway, a bespoke dining nook offers an upholstered banquette beneath a vintage light fixture.

A suitably lush primary bedroom suite gets another wood-burning fireplace and a walk-in closet. The second bedroom maximizes its compact square footage with a built-in bed for convenience, while not cutting any corners on charm.

The home’s two bathrooms feature the same design-minded details with luxurious materials and fixtures. In the primary bath, deep blue Waterworks tile joins a Grigio Carnico marble bath and a custom vanity. The guest bathroom is done in moss green Waterworks tile, with a Calacatta Viola marble backsplash.

Built in 1890, the five-story elevator co-op offers common laundry facilities (though the apartment has an in-unit washer/dryer) and bike storage. Accessed by several subway lines, the pretty, historic West Village enclave is one of New York City’s most coveted neighborhoods.

[Listing details: 104 Bedford Street #2DE at CityRealty]

[At The Corcoran Group by Sara Schwartz and Carter M. Wilcox]

RELATED: 

The post For $2.75M, this West Village co-op exemplifies timeless, sophisticated design first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Three housing organizations sent a letter this week to leaders at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), regarding pending changes to condominium lending rules through the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs).

On July 8, the Community Home Lenders of America (CHLA), the Community Associations Institute (CAI) and the National Association of Mortgage Brokers (NAMB) told federal housing officials that they have “significant concerns” about affordability, access and inventory as they relate to the GSEs’ condo policy changes announced in March.

The letter, dated July 8, was addressed to FHFA Director Bill Pulte, Fannie Mae acting CEO Peter Akwaboah and Freddie Mac CEO Kenny Smith.

The letter addressed the role of community associations in the housing market, stating that they aren’t a “niche segment.” The groups cited 2025 data from the Foundation for Community Association Research showing that roughly 35% of the nation’s housing is located in a community association — including planned communities, condo associations and co-ops. About 78 million people live in the 373,000 community associations in the U.S.

“For many first-time buyers, moderate-income households, seniors and buyers in higher-cost markets, condominiums remain one of the most attainable paths to homeownership,” the groups said.

Higher costs, lower participation

CHLA, CAI and NAMB wrote that while they support “thoughtful efforts” to build financial resilience across condo communities, they believe the “scope, pace and operational impact” of the changes could unintentionally raise costs for borrowers and associations alike. They could also disincentivize lender participate in GSE condo loan programs while limiting credit availability for “otherwise qualified purchasers and financially stable communities.”

The groups cited the pending elimination of limited reviews in favor of full reviews — a change that’s set to take effect Aug. 3. Historically, many condo projects have qualified for streamlined treatments. But full reviews across the board are likely to increase documentation requirements, third-party review costs and processing times, they said.

“These operational burdens will fall on lenders, community managers, volunteer boards and homeowners, and the added costs will ultimately be borne by consumers,” the groups wrote, estimating that some borrowers could pay more than $1,000 in additional costs for a full review.

The letter also argued that raising required condo project reserves from 10% to 15% — a change that goes into effect Jan. 4, 2027 — will push monthly association dues higher while creating the need for additional special assessments and increased insurance costs. The groups say that while “reserve adequacy is important,” across-the-board increases are excessive as they don’t account for different risk profiles among condo projects.

Similarly, the increase in required condominium project reserves from 10% to 15% will lead to higher HOA fees, additional special assessments and increased insurance costs. While reserve adequacy is important, a uniform increase applied across widely varying project types may reduce affordability for current owners and prospective purchasers without fully accounting for differing project risk profiles.

The letter went on to say there is “continuing ambiguity” tied to the definition and application of “critical repairs” for condo projects. “Lenders have reported instances where performing loans were subjected to repurchase demands involving relatively minor repair items that appeared unrelated to material safety or structural concerns. Greater clarity and consistency would improve lender confidence and reduce unnecessary costs while preserving prudent risk management,” the groups explained.

Lastly, the groups believe that smaller lenders will have a “competitive disadvantage” as limited access to condo project eligibility creates friction. “As full condo reviews become mandatory, broader access to project status information becomes increasingly important for efficient market functioning — otherwise key stakeholders are shut out of direct access to condo project eligibility status information,” they said.

Suggested improvements

The letter encouraged the FHFA and GSEs to consider multiple options that could “preserve affordability and access while maintaining strong safety and soundness standards.”

First, the agencies could offer temporary underwriting exceptions that would speed reviews on transactions with lower risk factors. These include mortgages with strong borrower credit profiles and lower loan-to-value ratios, as well as projects that have a demonstrated history of financial health.

The CHLA, CAI and NAMB also called for delaying the implementation of the new reserve study funding standards and related reserve funding requirements for at least a year beyond the current effective date of Jan. 4, 2027. That idea was also recently mentioned by Mat Ishbia, chairman and CEO of United Wholesale Mortgage (UWM) — the nation’s largest lender.

“Overall, the industry is saying, ‘We understand what you’re trying to do, but we’ve got to delay this because it’s going to cause a major disruption in the condo market,’” Ishbia said.

The groups want to “clarify and standardize” the definitions of critical repairs and thresholds for loan repurchases as they seek to ensure enforcement is commensurate with actual transaction risk. They also wish to reevaluate the need for a single underwriting standard across all types of condo projects. For example, they say that an oceanfront high-rise carries more risk than a garden-style property in the Midwest, but both are subject to the same underwriting burdens.

The letter seeks “greater alignment” between the GSEs and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) to share condo project eligibility details. This would reduce duplicative reviews and inconsistencies while removing unnecessary costs from the process, the groups say.

“A one-year delay and collaborative review would avoid potential market disruption, allow time to develop more flexibilities with clearer implementation guidance and prevent the problems that would otherwise arise in market adjustment to the policies,” the groups concluded.

“We fully support policies that protect taxpayers, strengthen collateral quality and promote long-term market stability. We believe these objectives can be achieved while also preserving access to one of the nation’s most affordable forms of homeownership.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Sales of previously owned U.S. homes declined in June even as prices climbed to a record high, the National Association of Realtors reported Thursday, underscoring how elevated borrowing costs continue to limit affordability during what is typically the busiest season for the housing market.

Existing-home sales fell 2.4% from May to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.09 million, below economists’ expectations of approximately 4.21 million, according to FactSet. Despite the monthly decline, sales remained 2.8% higher than a year earlier.

At the same time, the median existing-home price reached a record $440,600 for the month of June, extending a long streak of annual price increases. The combination of slowing sales and record prices continues to challenge prospective buyers, many of whom remain priced out of the market despite modest improvements in housing inventory.

Dr. Lawrence Yun, Chief Economist for the National Association of Realtors, attributed much of the market’s weakness to mortgage affordability. He said monthly fluctuations in existing-home sales continue to track even modest changes in mortgage rates, demonstrating just how sensitive buyers remain to financing costs. While Yun pointed to continued job growth as a positive long-term factor supporting housing demand, he emphasized that affordability remains the industry’s biggest obstacle and reiterated the need for substantially more housing supply.

Mortgage rates remain central to the market’s direction. According to Freddie Mac, the average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage stood at 6.43% as of July 2, marking a seven-week low and down slightly from 6.49% the previous week and 6.67% one year earlier. Because existing-home sales are recorded at closing, June’s figures primarily reflect purchase contracts signed in April and May, when mortgage rates were moving higher.

Those borrowing costs continue to be influenced by Treasury yields, which have risen as investors respond to higher oil prices, persistent inflation concerns and renewed geopolitical tensions in the Middle East. As long as long-term Treasury yields remain elevated, mortgage rates are likely to remain under pressure as well, limiting affordability for many prospective buyers.

The composition of homebuyers also reflected the affordability challenge. First-time buyers accounted for 33% of June transactions, up from 30% a year earlier but still well below the 40% share that the National Association of Realtors considers representative of a healthy housing market. Meanwhile, approximately 25% of all purchases were completed with cash, illustrating the continued advantage enjoyed by buyers less dependent on financing.

Housing inventory showed modest improvement. Roughly 1.56 million existing homes were available for sale at the end of June, about 1.3% higher than one year earlier. Even so, that represents only a 4.6-month supply, remaining below the level generally considered balanced between buyers and sellers.

The slowdown has now persisted for several years. Existing-home sales have remained near an annual pace of 4 million since 2023, well below the long-term historical average of roughly 5.2 million. Through the first half of 2026, total sales were only 0.7% above the same period a year earlier, reflecting a market that continues to struggle despite solid employment and resilient consumer demand.

The housing slowdown affects far more than homebuyers and real estate agents. Every home sale typically generates additional spending on furniture, appliances, home improvements, moving services, insurance, mortgage financing and numerous local businesses. When housing activity slows, those industries often experience weaker demand as well, reducing economic activity across a broad range of sectors.

Lawmakers continue debating measures designed to increase housing supply and improve affordability, but meaningful expansion of inventory will take time. In the meantime, economists generally expect mortgage rates to remain above historical norms, limiting affordability for many households.

With home prices at record highs, mortgage rates still above 6%, and inventory remaining relatively limited, June’s housing report suggests the market continues to face significant affordability pressures. Until either financing costs decline meaningfully or substantially more homes become available, many prospective buyers are likely to remain on the sidelines.

JBizNews Desk | Washington

© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or distribution without written permission is prohibited.

On:

The 2026 RealTrends Verified City Rankings recognize nearly 75,000 real estate agents and teams whose combined production reached $1.63 trillion in sales volume and 2.5 million transaction sides. The results reveal where the industry’s highest-performing professionals are concentrated — and how differently agents and teams are building scale across local markets.

The rankings include 74,906 entries across 5,249 cities, with 24,382 agents and teams qualifying specifically for city-level recognition. The expanded rankings offer a more local view of the professionals and businesses driving residential real estate production across the country.

“The RealTrends Verified City Rankings were built around a simple idea: If real estate is local, recognition should be too,” says Caroline Scanlon, director of the RealTrends Verified program. “Every year, we’re expanding our reach so we can recognize more cities, celebrate more local leaders and continue setting the standard for excellence in residential real estate.”

New York City dominates the combined rankings

The five boroughs of New York City led the country with 1,378 ranked agents and teams. Scottsdale followed with 785, while Houston had 690, Los Angeles had 654 and Dallas had 643.

New York City also led combined production volume by a wide margin, with nearly $58 billion. Dallas ranked second at $32.64 billion, followed closely by Los Angeles at $31.8 billion. Chicago generated $29.66 billion, while Phoenix rounded out the top five with $25.93 billion.

The numbers show that cities can reach the top through different combinations of price point, transaction activity and business scale. New York and Los Angeles benefit from high-value luxury markets, while Dallas, Phoenix and other growth markets generate substantial production across broad metropolitan footprints.

Scottsdale’s second-place finish by number of ranked professionals is particularly notable. Although smaller than most cities on the list, it has developed a deep pool of high-producing agents and teams supported by luxury, second-home and relocation business.

Individual agents remain the largest group

The overall rankings include 54,283 individual agents, of which 20,142 are city-ranked only. Compared with 20,623 teams, of which 4,240 were city-ranked only.

Individual agents generated $792.7 billion in volume and more than 1.2 million sides.

New York City had the largest number of ranked agents, with 818. Scottsdale followed with 658, then Houston with 530, Los Angeles with 512 and Atlanta with 421.

chart visualization

Beverly Hills led individual-agent production by volume at $13.19 billion, surpassing New York City’s $11.69 billion and Los Angeles’ $11.4 billion. Scottsdale ranked fourth with $9.56 billion, followed by Houston at $8.46 billion.

The results illustrate the influence of price point on agent production. Beverly Hills had fewer ranked agents than several leading cities but still generated the most volume, reflecting the market’s concentration of high-value properties and luxury specialists.

chart visualization

By sides, Scottsdale ranked first with 16,248.4, followed by New York City with 14,386.7, Houston with 12,981.5, Los Angeles with 11,924.8 and Atlanta with 10,103.2.

chart visualization

That list reflects a different kind of strength. Scottsdale, Houston and Atlanta demonstrate how agents can build nationally significant businesses through transaction velocity, geographic reach and repeatable operating systems — not only through luxury pricing.

Teams generate more production with fewer entries

Although teams represented less than one-third of all entries, they generated $832.69 billion in volume and nearly 1.29 million sides — surpassing individual agents in both measures.

New York City led with 560 ranked teams, followed by Chicago with 241, Dallas with 200, Austin with 195 and Denver with 180.

chart visualization

New York teams produced $46.26 billion in sales volume, nearly twice Dallas’ second-place total of $24.39 billion. Chicago followed with $23.87 billion, Austin with $22.95 billion and Phoenix with $21.44 billion.

chart visualization

New York also led team production by sides with 58,943.8. Chicago ranked second with 32,517.4, followed by Dallas with 31,876.1, Phoenix with 29,684.9 and Austin with 28,992.7.

chart visualization

The team results underscore how leverage is reshaping top production. Teams can distribute lead generation, client service, marketing and transaction management across specialized roles, allowing them to handle more business than most individual practitioners.

Small teams form the industry’s broadest production base

New York led the small-team category with 392 ranked teams, followed by Chicago with 172 and Dallas with 161.

New York small teams generated $28.46 billion and 36,412.5 sides. Dallas ranked second by volume at $12.85 billion, while Chicago ranked third at $11.93 billion. Chicago edged Dallas in sides, with 16,843.9 compared with 16,208.7.

The category shows that scale does not necessarily require a massive organization. Small teams remain a major production engine because they can combine the flexibility of an agent-led business with enough operational support to increase capacity.

Larger team models concentrate production

New York also led the medium-team category with 97 ranked teams, followed by Dallas with 58 and Austin with 53. Those markets also led medium-team sides, with New York recording 12,487.3, Dallas 6,921.8 and Austin 6,408.5.

Among large teams, New York ranked first with 38, followed by Dallas with 27 and Phoenix with 25. New York led large-team volume at $9.68 billion and sides at 9,158.6. Phoenix ranked second in both measures, followed by Dallas.

The concentration became even more pronounced among mega and enterprise teams. New York had 18 ranked mega teams and 15 enterprise teams, while Phoenix had 16 mega teams and eight enterprise teams.

New York led mega-team sides with 7,914.2 and enterprise-team sides with 5,218.7. Phoenix ranked second in both categories, while Dallas ranked third.

The larger-team rankings show how a relatively small number of businesses can account for substantial production within a market. As teams grow, their results depend increasingly on recruiting, technology, lead conversion and operational discipline rather than the production of a single rainmaker.

Taken together, the City Rankings show that real estate production remains intensely local — but the business models behind that production are becoming increasingly sophisticated. Luxury specialists, high-velocity individual agents and scaled teams can all lead their markets, but they are taking very different paths to get there.

This article was written by Tracey Velt with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Washington says it wants to lower costs and expand access to credit. For millions of entrepreneurs, access to credit depends not only on the health of their businesses but also on their personal credit profiles. That is why regulatory decisions that make borrowing more complex or expensive deserve close scrutiny. 

Recent disclosures obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by the Housing Policy Council raise important questions about the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s (FHFA) decision to require the use of two credit scores for mortgages sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

As part of an FHFA-directed review of credit score models, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were asked to evaluate and recommend which models should be approved. Both Enterprises recommended moving to a single modernized credit score that incorporates trended credit data and advised against requiring an additional score as part of the transition. FHFA overruled that recommendation and instead required a dual-score framework.

That decision carries real consequences for borrowers, lenders and small businesses by raising costs and introducing uncertainty into mortgage underwriting, and it warrants reconsideration before implementation is locked in.

Unanswered questions in the FHFA review process 

The FOIA disclosures are noteworthy because they show that FHFA’s own review process produced a different recommendation than the one ultimately adopted. FHFA itself stated that “requiring two different scores for each borrower is a significant change” and acknowledged that implementation would be a multiyear effort because of the “complexity and broad impact to the industry.” The agency also noted that credit scores are used throughout the mortgage process and that determining how two different scores will operate across systems will require extensive coordination among lenders, investors, mortgage insurers and other stakeholders.

FHFA argues that requiring multiple scores will improve accuracy, prevent adverse selection and promote competition within the mortgage market. Its determination states that requiring lenders to deliver both scores would prevent lenders from choosing which score to use for eligibility or pricing. But if the Enterprises themselves, after conducting the requested evaluations, did not conclude that two scores were necessary, it is reasonable to ask what evidence justifies overriding that recommendation. FHFA has also stated that it is not publicly releasing the underlying testing results, making it difficult for outside stakeholders to independently evaluate the agency’s conclusions.

Systemic costs and real-world consequences 

For mortgage lenders, implementation extends beyond simply obtaining an additional score. In practice, it can mean updates to loan origination systems, pricing engines, compliance procedures, quality-control reviews, secondary-market delivery processes and investor reporting requirements. Mortgage technology providers and lenders alike will need to test, validate and monitor how multiple scores affect underwriting and pricing decisions. Those investments may be manageable for large institutions, but they still carry costs that ultimately flow through the mortgage system.

For small businesses, this is not an abstract debate. Personal and business finances remain closely linked for many entrepreneurs. Federal Reserve survey data show that 59% of small businesses with debt rely on a personal guarantee, while more than half of firms facing financial challenges reported using personal funds to support their businesses. Changes that affect the cost, availability or predictability of consumer credit can ultimately affect the ability of small business owners to invest, hire and grow.

When lenders face new operational mandates, those costs do not remain confined to compliance departments. Over time, lenders often incorporate added complexity and uncertainty into pricing models, risk management practices and underwriting standards. That can mean higher rates, tighter credit or reduced flexibility for borrowers near approval thresholds, including self-employed applicants, entrepreneurs with thin credit files, first-time homebuyers and borrowers whose risk characteristics may be assessed differently across models.

Preserving flexibility in credit modernization 

Supporters of the dual-score framework point to competition and pricing concerns. But requiring two scores does not automatically resolve those concerns. Credit scores represent only one component of the mortgage process, while broader cost pressures stem from technology investments, regulatory compliance obligations, operational requirements and other market factors. Introducing parallel scoring frameworks risks adding costs for lenders without clearly reducing costs for borrowers.

Importantly, the issue is not whether the mortgage market should adopt newer credit scoring models. Updating credit scoring models to reflect evolving data and risk patterns is appropriate and necessary. The question is whether requiring both models simultaneously creates benefits sufficient to justify the added operational burden.

A simpler approach would preserve flexibility while reducing risk: Allow lenders to rely on a single modernized score, with the option to use additional models where appropriate. That approach would promote innovation without forcing unnecessary complexity into a system that directly affects borrowing costs.

FHFA still has time to reconsider how this transition is implemented. Before moving further, the agency should publicly release the analysis underlying its decision, explain why it departed from its own Enterprise review process and demonstrate that the benefits outweigh the costs lenders, borrowers and small businesses will ultimately bear.

John Stanford, Co-executive Director, Small Business Roundtable
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The multifamily capital stack is evolving. As elevated interest rates and tighter loan proceeds continue to reshape acquisition and refinancing strategies, investors are challenged by a market where senior loan proceeds and liquidity preservation are constrained. One effective solution is proprietary preferred equity behind Freddie Mac conventional loans.

As demand for preferred equity Freddie Mac structures grows, investors are increasingly using the strategy to create more flexible and efficient capital stacks. Jean-Laurent Pouliot, managing director and senior production officer at Arbor Realty Trust, discusses how the product works, the borrower challenges it helps solve, the advantages of combining preferred equity and Freddie Mac financing through a single lender, and why he believes flexible capital solutions will play an increasingly important role in multifamily finance.

Preferred equity’s role in today’s multifamily market

HW: Preferred equity behind Freddie Mac conventional loans is becoming an increasingly viable financing option among multifamily investors. What is it, how does it work and why is demand growing?

Jean-Laurent Pouliot: At its core, preferred equity sits between senior mortgage financing and common equity. It gives sponsors access to additional capital without sacrificing meaningful control over an asset or locking them into inflexible financing structures.

Most investors use it as a tool for flexibility. While pref equity increases leverage, borrowers often use it strategically to preserve liquidity, reduce the amount of common equity required and execute their business plan. It can help fund capital expenditures, value-add business plans, lease-up initiatives or recapitalizations while preserving ownership economics. 

Demand has increased as interest rates remain elevated and loan proceeds are often lower than borrowers expected. At the same time, many loans originated during the low-rate environment are approaching maturity.

Preferred equity can help bridge financing gaps while allowing investors to continue executing business plans and capturing future upside.

Why certainty of execution matters more than ever

HW: Investors are increasingly focused on efficiency and certainty of execution. How is that influencing financing decisions?

JLP: Historically, investors relied on two primary sources of capital: debt and equity. Preferred equity itself is not new. What is new is the ability to provide preferred equity alongside Freddie Mac financing through the same lender.

Arbor now fills the two formerly separate roles of Freddie Mac lender and preferred equity provider. For years, third-party preferred equity providers often caused delays because they operated under different incentives, timelines and underwriting processes. When preferred equity and senior debt are managed separately, coordination becomes more difficult.

By bringing both components under one roof, everyone is aligned around the same transaction objectives. The underwriting teams, the borrower and the lender are all working toward the same timeline and execution goals. In today’s environment, certainty of execution has become one of the most important considerations for investors. When underwriting, documentation, execution and servicing are coordinated, it significantly improves the overall borrower experience.

Solving borrower challenges with a unified structure

HW: What borrower challenges does this structure solve that traditional financing approaches may not address?

JLP: From Freddie Mac’s perspective, the goal was to create greater consistency around how preferred equity works within agency financing. For borrowers, the benefits are both operational and financial. Integrating senior debt and preferred equity streamlines duplicate reports, appraisals and legal work, creating meaningful cost savings. 

More importantly, borrowers gain alignment across the transaction. Instead of coordinating multiple parties with different objectives, they work with a single lender that manages both components of the capital stack. That creates a smoother process, improves execution and helps keep transactions on schedule.

The advantages of a preferred equity Freddie Mac one-stop shop approach

HW: How does securing senior debt and preferred equity through the same lender improve the borrower experience?

JLP: Freddie Mac financing requires specialized expertise. Arbor has spent years developing a deep understanding of how Freddie evaluates risk, structures transactions and approaches underwriting. That experience helps us anticipate challenges and structure deals in ways that align with Freddie’s framework. 

When that knowledge is combined with proprietary preferred equity, borrowers benefit from a more integrated process. Because we’re working closely with Freddie throughout the transaction, we can create efficiencies, streamline execution and help move deals smoothly from underwriting through closing and servicing. Then, with the senior loan and the pref equity piece serviced under one roof, borrowers receive big advantages not just upfront but throughout the life of the loan. That’s the value of a true one-stop-shop approach.

Determining when preferred equity is the right fit

HW: How should investors evaluate whether preferred equity belongs in their capital strategy?

JLP: The answer depends on the business plan. A straightforward example is an acquisition where loan proceeds cover only part of the purchase price, but the sponsor wants to preserve liquidity and avoid raising additional common equity. Preferred equity can provide that additional capital while allowing the sponsor to maintain control.

Another powerful feature is phased contributions, available only through Arbor. A transaction may qualify for $10 million in preferred equity, but the borrower may only need $2.5 million initially for renovations. The remaining capital can be accessed later as the business plan progresses, helping investors avoid paying for unused capital while maintaining flexibility. Although future preferred equity fundings remain subject to updated underwriting requirements.

Preferred equity can also be effective in refinancing situations, particularly as loans originated during the low-rate environment face today’s higher rates. In some cases, it can help bridge the gap between existing loan balances and new loan proceeds.

The strategy becomes even more compelling when paired with Freddie Mac’s supplemental financing programs. As property performance improves, borrowers may be able to access supplemental financing and use those proceeds to pay down preferred equity.

The future of the multifamily capital stack 

HW: Looking ahead, how do you see the multifamily capital stack evolving?

JLP: The multifamily capital stack will continue evolving toward greater flexibility and sophistication. Interest rates remain elevated, senior loan proceeds are constrained in many cases, and investors are increasingly focused on preserving liquidity. Those dynamics should continue supporting demand for preferred equity.

We’re also seeing investors move away from viewing preferred equity as a last-resort financing tool. It is becoming an increasingly intentional component of the capital stack because it can complement acquisition, refinancing and recapitalization strategies. Preserving liquidity has become the principal reason sophisticated borrowers are using Arbor preferred equity.

The most effective capital structures going forward will be those that provide optionality throughout the life of an investment. Features such as phased contributions, prepayability, the ability to right-size capital needs over time and compatibility with Freddie Mac supplemental financing give investors the flexibility to adapt as business plans evolve.

Click Here

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Indianapolis-based apartment developer Milhaus started building an apartment project in Manatee County, Florida, under the state’s Live Local Act after securing its funding earlier this year.

It may be one of the few to be built in the county, next to Sarasota, under the law, until lawsuits over a major increase in impact fees are resolved.

Manatee has quickly emerged as a broader litmus test of how municipalities continue to hinder housing development, even as laws change to encourage more housing. Fights over Live Local projects continue.

In Manatee County, the fight isn’t about the Live Local Act, but a law enacted last year to limit impact fees in hurricane-stricken areas.

County officials raised fees dramatically last year for all development, invoking the “extraordinary circumstances” exception under Manatee County’s 2021 impact fee law. They said the increase would pay for the infrastructure needed to handle growth. Officials made the move despite Senate Bill 180 freezing major fee increases through October 2027.

Housing advocates and developers say the fees offset the financial incentives that make Live Local projects attractive, including workforce housing.

Developers sued the county over the fees. The county joined a lawsuit against the state over last year’s bill.

While that dispute unfolded, state lawmakers closed more loopholes in the 2023 Live Local law that preempted local zoning. Live Local is now in its 4.0 version.

The math behind the increase

Manatee County commissioners raised impact fees to the state maximum on June 5, 2025. The vote was unanimous, 6-0, with one commissioner absent earlier in the process.

Fees jumped from roughly $13,442 to $16,328 per unit. Under the new schedule, some categories now reach $33,875 per unit, an increase of 69% to 169% depending on housing type.

Consultant Benesch argued 2015-based rates left millions of dollars uncollected. Commissioners framed the increase as growth paying for itself, not as housing policy.

The new rates took effect in early September last year. Developers who filed permits by Sept. 4 locked in the old, lower fees. Anyone filing after that date absorbed the full increase.

Legal fights add uncertainty

Developers sued the county, arguing the fee hike violates SB 180. That law bars more burdensome development rules in hurricane-affected areas for roughly two years.

Florida’s Department of Commerce sent a warning letter last August. Secretary Alex Kelly said the fee increase potentially violated SB 180. The state also withheld $3 million tied to the dispute.

Manatee County pushed back. Commissioners voted in July 2025 to fight SB 180 directly, directing lobbyists to seek its repeal. The county also joined a separate lawsuit challenging the law’s constitutionality.

Beginning with Live Local

Under Live Local, housing developments bypass zoning hearings. The county’s own resolution describes Live Local procedures as supporting its affordable housing goals.

Milhaus entered with the county’s first Live Local project. A couple of others are now in the pipeline. The process has been a learning curve for everyone involved.

“We took the brunt of a learning curve,” Brad Vogelsmeier, Milhaus’s vice president of development, told HousingWire TBD.

Officials were new to Live Local. They were still figuring out, for example, what belongs in a land use restriction agreement that locks in affordability for a set period.

“We’re not technically supposed to go through public vote council approval,” Vogelsmeier said. “That was probably the highest barrier.”

Milhaus now has 231 units under construction, with completion targeted for November 2027.

Atlanta-based Rangewater Development has a 300-unit Live Local project underway in Manatee after winning approval earlier this year.

What comes next

Future Live Local projects in Manatee will likely sit on the shelf now that fees are high enough to erase much of their advantage.

Manatee is still trying to recover the nearly $3 million in withheld state funds. Until a court rules or the fee schedule changes, developers face a math problem.

“LLA projects will likely become less feasible if the county wins the case, but so will all development,” Kody Glazer, Florida Housing Coalition’s chief legal and policy director, told HousingWire TBD.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:
2026 World Cup

With the 2026 FIFA World Cup making headlines, a recent PropertyShark market study revealed that in five of the 11 hosting cities, the cheapest available ticket for the most expensive game is now on par with – or above – a full month of rent or mortgage payments. Even at the low end, seats for many of the most anticipated matches already translate into a significant share of a typical household’s monthly housing cost.

The PropertyShark study analyzed the lowest available ticket price for each city’s most expensive group-stage match and priciest overall match (at the time of the publication). The analysis compared that against the local average rent and estimated monthly mortgage payment. Mortgage estimates were based on local median sale prices using a 30-year mortgage at 6.5% interest with 20% down payment and rental figures were provided by RentCafe.

Ticket prices remain subject to dynamic pricing and resale-market shifts and the exact figures presented in this study were applicable at the original time of the publication, June 4.

Five Host Cities Already Reach the One-Month Housing Costs Threshold

The broad takeaway is straightforward: In five of the 11 U.S. host cities, the cheapest ticket to the most expensive local match costs at least as much as one month of rent or mortgage, with New York City standing out the most. At current pricing, the least expensive ticket to the World Cup final would cover more than six weeks of average rent in the city and nearly two months of average mortgage payments.

Even before the knockout rounds, the numbers are substantial. In eight of the 11 host cities, the cheapest ticket to a top-priced group-stage match already represented at least 10 days of rent or about one week of mortgage expense. In other words, the affordability gap is not limited to the final rounds of the tournament.

Pricing Highlights in the 11 U.S. Host Cities

FIFA ticket New York

New York City displays the most extreme comparison. The cheapest ticket to the July 19 final is $7,256, while average monthly mortgage and rent costs stand at $4,096 and $4,872, respectively. This is the equivalent of six weeks of rent costs or nearly two months of mortgage payments. Even a major group-stage match such as Brazil versus Morocco cost $1,465 or about one-third of a month’s housing costs.

Miami FIFA ticket

Miami also showed one of the most striking examples. The Colombia-Portugal match is priced at $2,700, compared with an average monthly mortgage payment of $2,731 and average rent of $2,696. Even Scotland versus Brazil, a more typical group-stage match, was priced at $1,673 or more than half a month of housing costs.

In Dallas, the Argentina versus Austria match carried a $1,096 entry point, nearly three weeks of rent (at a $1,578 average rent) and close to half a mortgage payment (set against a $465,000 median sale price). The July 14 semi-final rises to $2,391, effectively matching a full month’s mortgage or six weeks of rent.

Atlanta’s group-stage prices are less severe, but its semi-final is not. The most affordable ticket to Spain versus Saudi Arabia cost $653, roughly one-third of a month’s rent or mortgage. Meanwhile, the July 15 semi-final is priced at $2,208, equivalent to around one month of mortgage or roughly five weeks of rent.

In Los Angeles, a USA versus Paraguay ticket started at a $905 minimum, equal to about 10 days of rent or one-fifth of a monthly mortgage. The July 10 quarterfinal rises to $1,564 or roughly one-third of a mortgage payment and more than two weeks of rent.

Kansas City is also a clear case where event pricing has moved into monthly-expense territory. A group-stage ticket to Argentina versus Algeria was significantly cheaper than other matches, priced at $823, but it still represents more than half a month of rent or mortgage. The July 11 quarterfinal is priced at $1,567, higher than the city’s average mortgage payment of $1,477 and its average rent of $1,342.

In Boston, the quarterfinal on July 9 is priced at $1,333 or more than one-quarter of a monthly mortgage and around 10 days of rent. This is prompted by the city’s $850,000 median sale price, which drives a $4,298 monthly mortgage cost and a $3,885 average rent.

Philadelphia remains the most affordable housing market among the host cities, but even there, ticket prices carry real weight. The cheapest seat for Match 89 on July 4 is $1,006, versus an average mortgage payment of $1,416 and monthly rent of $1,984. Brazil vs. Haiti, the city’s most in-demand group-stage match, was priced at a minimum $855, meaning that locals had to spend over 50% of a month’s mortgage or the rough equivalent of two weeks of rent.

Seattle, already an expensive housing market, also shows meaningful ticket-to-housing comparisons. Seattle’s USA versus Australia match cost $1,096 or roughly one-quarter of the average mortgage and half a month’s rent.

Houston is somewhat lower, but still notable. The Portugal versus Uzbekistan match was priced at $802, equal to more than two weeks of average rent and about half a month’s mortgage. The city’s most expensive match overall, Match 90 on July 4, is slightly higher at $854.

San Francisco is the main outlier, since housing costs are already high there and the city got a weaker group stage. Paraguay versus Türkiye was priced at $391 or about three days of rent and 6% of the average monthly mortgage. Meanwhile, the city’s most expensive scheduled match is $682, equal to roughly six days of rent and 10% of a monthly mortgage payment.

World Cup Pricing: Locals Might Choose Between Tickets or Housing Bills

What makes the comparison notable is not just the absolute ticket price, but the fact that entry-level access to the biggest matches is now aligned with one of the most important monthly household expenses.

Once the tournament moves beyond the group stage, the cheapest available seats in several markets sit squarely in the same range as monthly rent or mortgage obligations. And because this analysis uses the lowest ticket prices available at the time of review, that means entry is effectively barred for the majority of locals.

Top FIFA games

Methodology

Ticket prices were compiled from the official FIFA World Cup 2026 portal and major ticket marketplaces, including GameTime, SeatGeek, StubHub, TicketData and Vivid Seats and include both primary and resale listings.

Prices were last verified at 7 a.m. EST on June 4, 2026.

Match opponents, dates and locations were sourced from FIFA World Cup 2026.

Median sale prices reflect PropertyShark’s proprietary data and local MLS research for April-May 2026. Mortgage estimates assume a 30-year loan at 6.5% interest with 20% down.

Rental figures come from RentCafe, a Yardi company, and reflect December 2025 data.

About PropertyShark

PropertyShark is an online real estate database and property research tool that provides building details, ownership information, comparable sales, and foreclosure data. Founded in 2003, PropertyShark serves real estate professionals and consumers in New York and other major U.S. markets.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

[Editor’s note: This is the second of a two-part article in the aftermath of filings this week from Dream Finders Homes and Beazer Homes, as Dream Finders pursues Beazer as an acquisition target. Here’s the link to Part 1]. 

The surface question in the Dream Finders Homes–Beazer Homes takeover contest is the one everybody is now asking. Is $32 per share enough? What’s thornier for both parties in this “Justify My Love” chapter of the saga is how ably they each contend with what happens next.

For Dream Finders, the latest increase raises the financial fallout of being wrong about what it is buying. The company has put forward an all-cash offer near the highest level at which Beazer shares have traded in more than 15 years, without yet having access to the confidential diligence it says it needs to confirm its best offer.

What’s more, Dream Finders will likely need to convince its own shareholders that it has the ability to improve Beazer’s performance. That is, while Dream Finders margins have remained above Beazer’s, Dream Finders has nonetheless experienced margin erosion due to the affordability-challenged environment the entire industry is grinding through.  

For Beazer, the risk runs in the opposite direction. If the board rejects the offer, if talks never begin, or if a transaction ultimately falls apart, the company would remain in the public market with the same operating challenges that left its shares well below $32 before Dream Finders appeared.

On one side, Dream Finders faces financial leverage and operational risk. On the other hand, Beazer faces uncertainty risk. Both turn on the same stubborn track-record fact: Beazer has underperformed.

That underperformance is what makes the company potentially attractive to Dream Finders. It is also what makes the economics and logistics of acquiring and turning it around so difficult to assess from the outside, not yet looking in.

The next stage of the contest, therefore, is no longer only about what Beazer is worth today. It is about which company can bear the risk of what happens after $32.

Beazer’s risk: what happens if $32 goes away?

Beazer’s position since Dream Finders first went public has been that the bidder undervalues the company.

At $25.75, that argument was one thing.

At $32, it becomes a tougher position to defend.

Dream Finders has now put forward a cash price near the upper end of where Beazer shares have traded in more than 15 years. Beazer, meanwhile, says its board is considering interest from additional parties, a “range of potential transactions” and the company’s standalone strategy.

Any of those paths may ultimately produce greater value. The uncertainty lies in whether they will.

That is the risk Beazer shareholders increasingly face if the Dream Finders transaction does not happen. The board is not simply weighing $32 against its own estimate of what the company should be worth. It is weighing a certain cash proposal against alternatives whose value, timing and execution remain uncertain.

The distinction matters because the market price Dream Finders disrupted in May reflected the investor sentiment and outlook as it existed then: Beazer’s assets, strategy, management team, profitability and prospects.

Dream Finders’ arrival changed that price. Its departure could change it again.

That does not mean Beazer’s shares would necessarily return to their pre-bid level if the transaction falls apart. Nor does it mean the board should accept an offer merely because rejecting it creates market risk. However, the board must recognize that past offers, whether $25.75 or $32, won’t necessarily set a future floor for the stock.

In any event, Beazer’s standalone scenario now carries a more visible burden of proof.

The question is no longer simply whether Beazer possesses assets worth more than Dream Finders is offering. Rather, it’s how, and over what period, Beazer can convert those assets into shareholder returns that exceed the value and solidity of $32 in cash.

That requires a diagnosis of the company’s underperformance. Longtime homebuilding equity analyst Dan Oppenheim sees two very different possibilities.

One is primarily operational. If Beazer owns fundamentally sound land but has failed to extract adequate margins because of sales, construction, overhead or execution problems, better management and processes could create substantial value.

That would support the case that Beazer can improve as an independent company. It would also strengthen Dream Finders’ thesis that an acquirer can do better with the same platform. The second possibility becomes a harder conundrum.

If Beazer’s profitability problem is rooted substantially in the price it paid for land and where it bought it, there may be no rapid operating fix.

“Once the land is acquired, you can only do so much,” Oppenheim said.

That observation cuts both ways.

For Beazer, the burden is no longer simply to point to book value or argue that $32 undervalues the company’s assets. The company must communicate a credible strategy for generating better results that will yield a present value greater than $32 in cash. Turning the ship may take time, but Beazer’s board and shareholders may insist on a more rapid turnaround in order to forgo the $32 offer.

Can Beazer improve margins and inventory turns? Can it generate stronger returns from the land it already owns and controls? How long will those improvements take, and what market and execution risks must shareholders accept while they wait?

Those questions matter because $32 is not a theoretical valuation. It is cash. The more compelling the offer becomes, the more concrete the case for walking away from it ultimately has to become.

DFH’s risk: the higher the price, the less room for error

Every increase in Dream Finders’ offer puts more pressure on Beazer’s board. Every increase also raises the cost to Dream Finders of misjudging what it is buying. That factor may now be the least examined – and the hardest to fathom, given current constraints on due diligence – part of the saga.

Much of the public discussion has focused on Beazer: What price should its board accept? Is $32 enough? Can the standalone company create more value? Are there other bidders or strategic alternatives?

The latest offer gives a different question equal billing. Is buying Beazer at $32 good for Dream Finders?

Not to ignore from a high-level, in addition to Dream Finders management thinking that it can improve BZH’s results, it may also see value in amping up deeper local scale in its existing markets, given the significant overlap between the two companies. This is not just about more volume across the country –  it wouldn’t meaningfully change DFH’s market presence – but is about greater scale in the existing markets to better compete with the largest builders. 

Beyond that 40-thousand-foot strategic gain, Dream Finders’ own late-yesterday response to Beazer underscores why that question remains open. The company said it is prepared to execute an NDA immediately and accept a limited standstill so it can begin due diligence and “confirm its best offer.”

That is the black box inside the proposal.

Dream Finders is willing to pay $32 based on what it knows publicly. It is still seeking access to what it does not know.. Beazer’s public results reveal the symptoms. The company has persistently lagged stronger-performing peers on profitability and returns. What the public record cannot neatly reveal is how much of that underperformance can be fixed by a new owner — and how much is embedded in land, capital and operating decisions already made.

Beazer’s underperformance is both an acquisition opportunity and a risk. Some potential savings are easier to envision. A buyer can eliminate duplicative public-company expenses and other corporate overhead. Dream Finders may find efficiencies in purchasing, construction, sales and operations, and it may believe its operating model can improve inventory turns and capital allocation. The harder questions lie deeper in Beazer’s existing asset base, “under the hood.”

A homebuilder does not acquire land as a blank slate. It inherits where the land is located, when it was purchased, how much development capital remains to be invested, and what home prices and absorption rates those communities can support.

Those variables do not lend themselves to a clean public spreadsheet. Nor do they disappear when ownership changes. Oppenheim’s point is not that Beazer cannot be improved. It is that the difficulty of the turnaround should not be underestimated: “They’ve been in the industry for a long time. If it were simple to turn things around there, they would have done so.”

That is where the risk to Dream Finders becomes more than a question of purchase price. Without full diligence, it is difficult to know whether Beazer’s performance gap represents readily recoverable upside or a more stubborn set of asset and operating constraints. And as Oppenheim notes, Dream Finders cannot yet claim that confidential diligence has revealed synergies or improvements that were invisible when it made its earlier offers.

Yet the price has continued to rise. At $32, Dream Finders has uncomfortably less room for error in the diagnosis.

The land doesn’t reset at closing

The uncertainty is particularly important around land. If Beazer’s weaker profitability is primarily an operating problem, Dream Finders may be able to improve sales execution, construction performance, overhead or inventory turns. Dream Finders apparently believes this is a key issue, seen in its willingness and persistence in pursuing the acquisition and as it highlighted Beazer’s “inability to extract value from existing land positions” in its investor presentation.

However, if a meaningful part of the problem is embedded in the basis and positioning of land Beazer already controls, the remedy is a slower and harder slog. Ownership can change overnight. Land economics do not.

Dream Finders has also indicated that land-bank capital could play a role in financing a transaction. Such structures may reduce the amount of capital Dream Finders itself must commit to acquire and hold Beazer’s land.

Beazer has increased its lots controlled via options, which stood at 60% as of March 31st, while Dream Finders would likely aim to utilize land banking structures to minimize the land held on balance sheet should it be able to complete the acquisition.

That can make a transaction more capital-efficient, but it does not make the land cheaper. A land banker must earn a return. Lots taken down from a third-party structure embed the interest burden of that capital provider. Dream Finders could therefore reduce the capital tied up in land while adding another cost that the homes built on those lots must absorb.

Without access to the detailed economics of Beazer’s land pipeline and Dream Finders’ prospective financing structure, attaching a tidy number to that burden would suggest a precision the public facts do not make clearly evident.

The strategic challenge is clear enough without one. Dream Finders may be able to reduce the capital required to control Beazer’s land. It still has to build and sell homes profitably on it.

That is the leverage risk inside the $32 offer: The higher the acquisition price and the more expensive the capital structure needed to support it, the more operating improvement Dream Finders must produce to justify the transaction.

Two different ways to get it wrong

The contest has now reached a point where neither company holds a risk-free position.

Beazer could be right that $32 undervalues the company, only to discover that its standalone improvement takes longer than expected, that other strategic alternatives fail to materialize, or that investors are unwilling to restore the valuation Dream Finders has put on the table.

Dream Finders could be right that Beazer is fixable, only to discover after gaining access to confidential information – or after completing a transaction –  that more of the underperformance is embedded in the assets than it expected.

That is why the latest disagreement over due diligence and the standstill matters beyond process. Dream Finders says it will sign an NDA and accept a limited standstill. It wants access to Beazer’s confidential information while preserving its ability to return to shareholders or nominate directors if engagement fails.

Beazer wants the 12-month restriction it says other interested parties have accepted. Behind that dispute is a more basic reality. Dream Finders wants to know more before confirming how far it is ultimately prepared to go. In the halting dialog it has opened up, Beazer seems to want Dream Finders to give up its hostile approach in order to get the chance to find out.

Dream Finders’ persistence may reflect a belief that Beazer’s underperformance is precisely what makes the company attractive. An efficiently-run company offers fewer obvious improvements for a buyer to capture. An underperforming one may offer more. But that all depends on whether the buyer correctly discerns what is wrong and can nimbly make those operational, business-impacting adjustments.

That is the paradox inside the pursuit. Beazer faces the uncertainty of turning away from $32, based on an inference that it can deliver something better, and then having to prove it can deliver something better. Dream Finders faces the leverage risk of paying $32 and then having to prove it can turn what it bought into something better.

The question is no longer simply whether $32 is enough for Beazer.

It is about determining which company can better manage the heightened risk of being wrong.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The Federal Reserve on Thursday outlined a slate of five new task forces led by prominent academics and business leaders. They will scrutinize how the central bank communicates, manages its balance sheet, interprets data, evaluates productivity and jobs, and responds to inflation.

The initiative, detailed in Fed press release, is aimed at advancing “the conduct of monetary policy” at a time when structural changes in the U.S. economy and advances in technology are testing longstanding policy frameworks.

“The Federal Reserve‘s commitment to price stability and maximum employment is unwavering. As is our resolve to pursue our mandate with rigor,” Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh said in a statement announcing the task forces. He framed the effort as a broad review of the tools and methods used by policymakers, emphasizing that the goal is to ensure the Fed is “best positioned to achieve our objectives in this consequential time.”

Warsh announced the coming formation of the task forces on June 17 during his first press conference as Fed chair. The groups themselves represent a shift in Fed policy as Warsh has explicitly stated the central bank will move away from the forward guidance given under former Chair Jerome Powell.

“Taking a fresh look at all of these areas should ultimately make the Fed operate more efficiently and effectively over time,” Marty Green, principal at Polunsky Beitel Green, previously told HousingWire. “It will also allow the Fed to perhaps better adjust policy in an economy that may evolve more quickly as artificial intelligence has a greater impact.”  

HousingWire Lead Analyst Logan Mohtashami said the task forces may signal Warsh’s desire to move away from the Fed’s dual mandate by Congress to achieve maximum employment and price stability.

“Look for the task force to eventually recommend losing the dual mandate that also includes maximum employment,” Mohtashami wrote. “But that move will need congressional approval, and I highly doubt he can muster the political support right now to make it happen. Warsh wants new ways to track labor and inflation data, which is fine.”

The five task forces will focus on areas central to the formation and communication of monetary policy and will be co-led by external advisers with experience in academia, business and central banking. They will be supported by Federal Reserve staff but are expected to operate independently and provide “candid feedback” and “rigorous findings” to the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC).

Task force areas and leaders

Communications. This group will review how the Fed conveys policy deliberations and decisions, particularly under uncertainty. Its leaders are:

  • Peter R. Fisher, professor of practice, Foster School of Business, University of Washington
  • Arminio Fraga, founder and chairman, Gávea Investimentos, and former president of the Central Bank of Brazil
  • Mervyn King, former governor of the Bank of England

Balance-sheet policy. This task force will examine the costs, benefits and institutional implications of the Fed’s current balance-sheet regime, an issue that has become central since the expansion of quantitative easing and ongoing balance-sheet runoff. Its leaders are:

  • Karen Dynan, professor of economics, Harvard University
  • Raghuram Rajan, professor of finance, University of Chicago Booth School of Business, and former governor of the Reserve Bank of India
  • Jeremy Stein, professor of economics, Harvard University, and former Federal Reserve Board governor

Data. This group will focus on improving the quality and timeliness of real-economy signals that feed into policy judgments, a key issue for markets that increasingly trade on high-frequency data and alternative indicators. Its leaders are:

  • Raj Chetty, professor of economics, Harvard University
  • Doug McMillon, former president and CEO of Walmart Inc.
  • Kevin Murphy, professor of economics, University of Chicago

Productivity and jobs. This task force will assess how new general-purpose technologies, including artificial intelligence, are affecting productivity, employment and wage dynamics, with the goal of better informing policy judgments on growth and labor markets. Its leaders are:

  • Marc Andreessen, co-founder and general partner, Andreessen Horowitz
  • Charles I. Jones, professor of economics, Stanford University, currently on leave at Anthropic
  • Asha Sharma, executive vice president and XBOX CEO, Microsoft Corp.

Inflation frameworks. This group will revisit how the Fed understands and responds to the drivers of inflation, including the framework it uses to target and communicate about price stability. Its leaders are:

  • Greg Mankiw, professor of economics, Harvard University, and former chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers
  • Thomas Sargent, professor of economics, New York University and Nobel laureate
  • William White, senior fellow, C.D. Howe Institute, and former economic adviser at the Bank for International Settlements

The Fed said more information on the task forces and their topics will be posted periodically on its website.

This article was written by Neil Pierson with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Chicago-based mortgage lender Rate announced on Thursday that more than a dozen loan officers have joined the company from California-headquartered New American Funding (NAF), bringing “nine figures in production volume with them.”

The group includes 14 loan officers: Lori Crabb, Maria Castorena, Cory Graciano, Donaciano Garcia Amaya, Jim Butz, Samuel Wagner, Kristi Hernandez, Andy Thom, Michael Giganti, Joe McCaslin, Kyle Travers, Peter Strahler, Jay Kunkle and Chad Geyer.

Per Modex data, the top producers among the group are Geyer with a year-to-date volume of $12.21 million and Travers with a year-to-date volume of $9.426 million.

Rate said several of the loan officers are returning to the company after spending time with other lenders, pointing to the company’s platform, technology and product offerings as factors behind the moves.

New American Funding did not return HousingWire‘s request for comment at the time of publication.

“The best in the business are making intentional decisions about where they can win,” said Shant Banosian, president of Rate. “They’re choosing the platform with the product depth, pricing, technology, execution and collaborative culture of sharing built to grow their business and give themselves and their partners a real competitive edge.

“When experienced producers look closely at what Rate offers, including those who have been here before, the decision speaks for itself.”

Some of the returning LOs cited Rate’s technology and lending platform as reasons for rejoining the company.

“I wasn’t actively looking to make a move, but after reconnecting with someone at Rate whom I greatly respected, I took a fresh look at the platform and everything that had evolved since my previous time there,” Kunkle said.

“The more I explored, the clearer the decision became. What ultimately brought me back was the combination of industry-leading technology, a broad product offering, competitive pricing, and a platform that truly allows me to better serve my clients and agent partners while continuing to grow my business.”

Geyer said Rate’s technology, products and pricing were among the factors influencing his decision to return.

“It’s great to be back at Rate,” Geyer said. “The tech, product, and rates are as good as it gets. My business is taking off, and I can better serve my borrowers and partners.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

In Salida, a small town in Central Colorado with about 6,000 residents, a long-vacant property serves as a reminder of the community’s past while offering a glimpse into the future. 

Cleora, a small railroad town established in 1880 in what is now the Salida area, served as an early settlement in the region. The town declined quickly after its founding and was officially abandoned in 1882 after its post office closed. For more than 150 years, the historic site remained vacant. 

Now, the 55-acre property is set to become an experimental residential development with 106 3D-printed homes, which will make it one of the largest 3D-printed communities in the United States. 

In that sense, the property represents a bridge between an early chapter in Salida’s history and an emerging future where new building methods could play a key role in expanding the nation’s housing supply.

Cleora at Salida East, where construction is now underway, has the makings of a transformational real estate project for the town of Salida. Beyond its local impact, the project could serve as a proving ground for emerging 3D-printing technology and its potential to alter how homes are built. 

Fine-tuning the 3D-printed process

The developers behind Cleora identified the property as a strong site for a 3D-printed development because it offered the scale, environment and market conditions needed to test and refine the technology. For one, the project provides enough housing volume to improve efficiency over time and make the project more economically viable. 

Additionally, Colorado’s challenging climate, mountainous terrain, labor constraints and high construction costs make Salida a good proof-of-concept setting for the technology. 

Cleora Managing Partner Greg Kenny told HousingWire TBD that the team is still refining its construction process.

“This is a great project to focus on. We can hit a large volume of homes and get to a point where we can value engineer this as we go. Like I said, out of the gate, it’s not cheaper or faster. It takes some time. It’s a steep learning curve,” Kenny said. 

Cleora partnered with RIC Robotics to integrate robotics into the construction process. The robotic printer acts like a large-scale construction worker, automatically placing layers of concrete to build wall systems on the job site, layer by layer. This process, in some respects, mirrors the way traditional construction workers stack masonry materials to form a building envelope.

3D-printed homes
Cleora is leveraging robotic printers to build 3D-printed homes on-site in Salida, Colorado. (Photo courtesy of Cleora)

The robotics technology, which is intended to make the construction process more efficient, can be useful in areas where construction labor is scarce. However, Ziyou Xu, founder of RIC Robotics, stressed that robotics isn’t meant to make humans obsolete. In fact, Cleora has partnered with Colorado Mountain College to give students hands-on training in the construction process. 

“We want to use robotics to subsidize labor, but this is not robots replacing labor,” Xu said. “The old generation is retiring. The new generation doesn’t want to use their hands to do manual labor anymore. They want to use the big robot, and now you can see teenagers on the job site operating the robot…that is the most fundamental change.”

The 3D-printed homes are designed to be more resilient than traditional wood-frame construction because their concrete walls offer greater resistance to wildfires, high winds, mold and severe weather. In an area like Salida, which is susceptible to wildfires, resiliency is key. 

Robotic construction can help bring the cost of the 3D-printed concrete homes closer to the cost of conventional stick-built homes, but the Cleora team acknowledged that there are still improvements to be made before the process can scale. The cost of building is still higher, and the process isn’t quite up to speed, but the robotics and continued improvements have helped. 

“As of right now, is it quicker? No, because we are still learning. But with that being said, we’re getting quicker every day and with every wall, quite frankly. At some point, I think it definitely will be quicker than stick-built. But we still want to make sure that the home is being built right,” said Jeff Post, another Managing Partner at Cleora. 

The road to mainstreaming 3D-Printed homes

The hype for 3D-printed homes is real, but 3D-printed housing has yet to scale in any sort of meaningful way. Lennar partnered with ICON to deliver 100 3D-printed homes in Georgetown, TX, but the technology, by and large, has failed to break out into the mainstream.

Kenny believes that 3D-printed homes haven’t yet scaled extensively because there are still improvements that need to be made.

“Why hasn’t it been adopted? It is more cost-ineffective out of the gate because you’re ramping up a new skill set,” Kenny said. “We’re one of the first to do something of this magnitude, leveraging this innovation in a commercial way.”

Broader adoption will depend on proving the technology at scale through commercially viable developments. Construction speeds and costs will also need to improve through experience and value engineering before wider adoption. 

Then, the robotics technology needs to become more widely accessible. RIC Robotics CEO Ryan Cox argued that one of the biggest barriers to widespread adoption of 3D-printed construction is the high cost and technical complexity of deploying robotic systems.

“One of the biggest obstacles that the industry’s had to overcome was the barrier to market entry in robotics. Previously, you were looking at millions of dollars in robotics mobilization and then a highly technical skill set,” Cox said. “The barrier to market entry in the beginning was just hard as heck to overcome.”

“Ric Robotics has kind of lowered that barrier by providing the opportunity to share equipment, the opportunity to share personnel, the opportunity to share knowledge, and not holding that in a capsule that you know you have to pay for, but instead giving it freely so we can expand not only the industry but our abilities within it,” Cox added. 

Robotics innovation gains steam

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recently opened applications for a program that would provide up to $10 million in funding to advance robotics and artificial intelligence in homebuilding. The goal of the program is to foster innovation and determine whether these technologies can accelerate construction, improve labor productivity, lower costs and ultimately increase housing supply. 

While the funding is geared toward factory-built housing, HUD’s initiative reflects a growing interest in using robotics and automation to improve residential construction and potentially lower the cost of housing. Any advancements in robotics could potentially benefit 3D-printed housing by improving efficiency, reducing costs and helping the technology move closer to broader adoption.

HUD has also previously supported efforts to test 3D-printed housing. In 2023, the agency awarded a $600,000 grant to the city of Nome, Alaska, to fund a portable 3D printer that would evaluate the technology’s performance in extreme sub-Arctic conditions. 

Whether or not HUD will provide future funding for 3D-printed homes is yet to be determined. However, the developers behind Cleora and RIC Robotics see their project as a crucial testing ground for the technology. As the industry looks for new ways to build faster and more cost-effectively, projects like Cleora may provide the real-world testing and refinement needed to move 3D-printed housing from experimentation to mainstream adoption.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Existing home sales declined in June as higher mortgage rates continued to weigh on buyer activity, although sales remained above year-earlier levels and home prices reached a new record, according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR).

Existing home sales fell 2.4% from May to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.09 million units. Compared with June 2025, sales increased 2.8%.

Sales rose month-over-month only in the Northeast, while the Midwest, South and West posted declines. On an annual basis, sales increased in the Midwest, South and West and were unchanged in the Northeast.

“The back-and-forth in monthly home sales activity, driven by mild fluctuations in mortgage rates, shows how sensitive home buyers are to affordability conditions,” said NAR Chief Economist Lawrence Yun. “However, job gains — more than half a million since the beginning of the year — will continue to provide support for the housing market.”

Inventory slips as prices continue climbing

Housing inventory totaled 1.56 million units at the end of June, down 0.6% from May but 1.3% higher than a year earlier. That represented a 4.6-month supply of unsold homes, up from 4.5 months in May and unchanged from June 2025.

The median existing home sales price rose to a record $440,600, up 1.8% from $432,700 a year earlier. June marked the 36th consecutive month of year-over-year price gains.

“The median home price has reached an all-time high. Even so, affordability is better than a year ago because wage growth is outpacing home price growth,” Yun said. “However, progress on long-term housing affordability could be hampered if inventory growth continues to stall. Without consistent gains in inventory, home prices can accelerate. It is critical to introduce more supply to the market to widen the opportunity for homeownership.”

The Housing Affordability Index improved to 102.3 from 95.5 a year earlier, with affordability increasing in every region.

Single-family sales outperform condominiums

Single-family home sales declined 2.4% from May to an annual rate of 3.73 million but increased 3.3% from a year earlier. The median single-family home price rose 1.8% year-over-year to $446,400.

Condominium and co-op sales fell 2.7% from May to an annual rate of 360,000 and were down 2.7% from June 2025. The median condo price increased 1.6% to $380,000.

“Today’s report reflects the uncertainty in the overall market,” said NewHomeSource Chief Economist Ali Wolf. “Discretionary buyers who have the flexibility to pause their buying plans will stay in this holding pattern until they feel conditions are more stable. Sellers too may be more cautious about listing their homes, and the combined effect is putting a damper on sales.

“This isn’t limited to existing home sales either; the majority of builders say demand is slower than expected, even with incentives being more commonplace than they were a year ago.”

Northeast posts the only monthly gain

Regionally, the Northeast was the only area to record a monthly sales gain, rising 2.1% to an annual rate of 480,000. Sales were unchanged from a year earlier, while the median price increased 3.9% to $564,800.

In the Midwest, sales fell 3.0% from May to an annual rate of 980,000 but increased 2.1% year-over-year. The median price rose 2.7% to $346,600.

Southern sales declined 3.6% month-over-month to an annual rate of 1.89 million, while increasing 3.8% from June 2025. The median price climbed 0.9% to $377,700.

Sales in the West decreased 1.3% from May to an annual rate of 740,000 and increased 2.8% year-over-year. The median sales price rose 0.9% to $633,600.

Buyer profile and mortgage rates

Homes remained on the market for a median of 28 days in June, down from 29 days in May but up from 27 days a year earlier.

First-time buyers accounted for 33% of purchases, down from 35% in May but up from 30% in June 2025. Cash sales represented 25% of transactions, unchanged from the previous month and down from 29% a year earlier.

“Until buyers and sellers gain more confidence in where the market is headed, both sides are likely to stay cautious, and sales activity may stay subdued,” Wolf added.

Individual investors and second-home buyers made up 13% of transactions, compared with 14% in both May and June 2025. Distressed sales, including foreclosures and short sales, accounted for 2% of transactions, up from 1% the previous month but down from 3% a year ago.

According to Freddie Mac, the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate was 6.49% in June, up from 6.44% in May but down from 6.82% a year earlier.

This article was written by Jonathan Delozier and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation. It was reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

American Express on Thursday broke ground on a new global headquarters at 2 World Trade Center, the final commerical tower of the Lower Manhattan campus. Developed by Silverstein Properties and designed by Foster+Partners, the tower at 200 Greenwich Street measures roughly 2 million square feet across 55 floors, with enough space for 10,000 American Express employees. Completion is scheduled for 2031.

Credit: Foster + Partners

The tower is rising on land owned by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey under a long-term ground lease. Construction is expected to generate more than 2,000 union jobs and 3,200 total jobs across New York City, while contributing an estimated $5.9 billion to the city’s economy and $6.3 billion to the state’s economy.

Standing 1,226 feet tall, the headquarters will feature flexible, modern workspaces designed to support collaboration, along with more than an acre of outdoor space spread across landscaped terraces and gardens offering skyline views.

The project will prioritize sustainability through smart-building technology, fully electric and energy-efficient systems, and a planned pursuit of LEED certification.

American Express moved into its current headquarters at 200 Vesey Street in 1986 and will remain there until the new tower is completed. The company has maintained a presence in NYC since its founding in 1850.

Denise Pickett, president of enterprise shared services at American Express, said the project reflects the company’s long-standing commitment to the city.

Credit: Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office on Flickr

“For American Express, this project is far more than a new headquarters,” Pickett said. “It is a reaffirmation of our belief in this city, our commitment to our colleagues, and our enduring connection to the community we have proudly called home for nearly two centuries.”

“Since our founding in 1850, New York has shaped who we are, and in turn, we have sought to contribute to its growth, vitality and success,” she added. “Today’s groundbreaking marks the next chapter in that shared story.”

The tower marks the final office component of the World Trade Center master plan, a 16-acre redevelopment of the site designed by Studio Libeskind after the firm won a design competition held in the aftermath of the attacks. The groundbreaking comes nearly 25 years after the September 11 attacks.

The plan includes office towers, a transportation hub, a visitor pavilion, and the 9/11 Memorial and Museum, according to Adamson Associates.

The history of the tower dates back to 2005, when Foster + Partners first unveiled a striking design featuring four columns topped by a diamond-shaped crown. Negotiations between Silverstein Properties and Fox Corporation later prompted a complete redesign, with Bjarke Ingels Group unveiling its vision in 2015.

After Fox ultimately decided to remain at its Midtown headquarters, Foster + Partners returned with a new design that removed the diamond crown. In 2022, the firm unveiled its latest iteration after American Express emerged as a potential tenant.

Updated visuals released in May 2025 showed subtle modifications while preserving the tower’s overall massing, as 6sqft previously reported.

RELATED:

The post American Express breaks ground on 55-story headquarters at 2 World Trade Center first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Bright MLS is set to implement a series of rule updates later this summer designed to give agents more options and sellers greater control over property data.

Changes also establish new protections around the use of listing information in artificial intelligence (AI) applications.

Other moves include a streamlined listing submission process, unified consumer display standards, new privacy controls for sellers and expanded pre-marketing options.

A central change reaffirms the requirement that all listings must be submitted to the MLS within two calendar days of signing a listing agreement. Bright is introducing a new option for situations where a property is not yet ready for public marketing.

Agents will be able to file the listing with the MLS in a new “Registered” status while they and their sellers prepare for its marketing launch.

This allows agents to remain compliant with the two-day submission rule without triggering public exposure before the seller is ready.

“The two days has been policy for a long time,” said Rajeev Sajja, chief artificial intelligence and product officer at Bright MLS. “However, with the additional options we’re giving them, they can add it in the MLS within two days — but still restrict exposure and take the journey with the visuals that were probably shared with you anyway.”

Sajja noted that agents have multiple layers of control available in the rule updates, including office exclusive status, coming soon status and active status with internet display options.

“There are stages that they can fully control exposure while still being compliant and not worrying about more exposure than before they’re ready for it,” he said.

New reporting option, privacy controls

Bright is consolidating its IDX and VOW rules into a single “Policy on Display for Consumer Search” with uniform display standards.

While the underlying display rules remain largely unchanged, the update introduces a mechanism for agents to report websites that fail to remove information added to their listings.

Sajja said agents may submit compliance tickets through Bright’s system — with the MLS pursuing enforcement against publishers that violate display rules.

“We have a strong compliance follow-through framework,” he said. “We get a few hundred compliance issues every month, so agents can report it, and we’ll obviously go after the publisher for that reason.”

The updates also introduce two advanced settings giving sellers more control over how their property data appears online. Photo suppression allows sellers to request that all but one exterior photo be suppressed from public-facing websites — while all photos remain fully visible to professionals within the Bright MLS system.

This expands upon a listing photo control option for off-market listings introduced in December.

Price suppression gives sellers the option to withhold the listing price from public sites.

“Our goal at an MLS is to truly empower any broker’s marketing strategy or an agent’s marketing strategy, so that they don’t say, ‘I can’t do this in an MLS because my seller is asking for it,’” Sajja said. “If they feel like we want to suppress the price for those, we have a path for that. If they want full exposure, we have a path for that.

“I think our goal is give them more options and have them choose the options that best fit their strategy.”

Sajja emphasized that Bright’s role is not to direct marketing strategy.  

“We are a neutral, transparent, cooperative marketplace,” he said. “We want to empower them with all the options they need.”

AI protections, data governance

Bright is taking what Sajja described as a proactive stance on how broker data is used — and not used — in AI applications.

The MLS is prohibiting anyone from downloading MLS data and uploading it to train AI models.

“The pitfalls [of uploading data directly to AI tools] is having AI models train on our data. We want to do it the right way and give them access,” Sajja said, referring to plans to provide subscribers with secure access to MLS data through tools like model context protocol servers.

Bright is also developing an application that will allow subscribers to utilize AI to ask questions and receive answers grounded in Bright’s market data.

Sajja added that he recently tested three large language models by asking for the list-to-sale price ratio in his neighborhood, and each gave a slightly different answer.

“If it was all connected to Bright’s trusted data, the answer would be exactly the same, and that’s where we’re headed,” he said. “We want to empower our brokers and agents to win at the client conversations, the kitchen table.”

Sajja also pointed to Bright’s recent efforts to enforce data use policies — including calling out large language models that were scraping listing photos without permission.

“We think we’re taking a proactive stance on how brokers’ data is used and not used in AI,” he said.

Broader strategy, launch date

Sajja said the rule changes preserve flexibility while protecting cooperation.

“We want to give the freedom to the broker to market the way they want as they work with their sellers to supports their strategy, and we don’t really pivot to one broker strategy over the other,” he said. “Our role, we think, is to empower every broker in our marketplace to compete on their strategy and give them the options to do that in the MLS.”

Bright has not finalized a specific date for the rule updates — saying that they will take effect later this summer.

Sajja said the timing is intended to give data feed recipients time to adapt to the changes, particularly photo suppression, which requires technical adjustments. “

“Photo suppression is a big thing,” he said. “I’m a technologist and I know coding. It takes a while to get that going, and we’ve heard that initially. So, we want to leave the window a little open and give them, respectfully, some time to get the changes done.”

Bright said it will provide additional details in the coming weeks to help subscribers navigate the new tools and settings.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Justin and Hailey Bieber paid $12 million for a luxury condo at the Herzog & de Meuron-designed 160 Leroy Street in the West Village. As first reported by the Wall Street Journal, the 2,800-square-foot residence is the couple’s first known home in New York City. The four-bedroom, four-and-a-half-bath condo features sweeping views of the Hudson River. The seller is real estate developer Steven Brauser, who purchased the unit for $10.5 million in 2018 and listed it for $12 million in April.

Photo © Travis Mark

The purchase comes at an eventful time for the couple. Justin recently released his seventh studio album, “Swag II,” and headlined this year’s Coachella music festival, while Hailey sold her skincare brand, Rhode, to e.l.f Beauty last year in a $1 billion deal, according to the Robb Report.

One of the four bedrooms was staged by New York-based luxury design firm Interior Marketing Group as a children’s room, featuring a custom chalkboard wall that the couple reportedly plans to keep for their son, Jack Blues.

Photo © Travis Mark

Brauser was represented by Adam Heller, Amanda Rosenberg, and Michael Gavin of the Heller Organization, while Romy Hechinger of Compass represented the Biebers in the transaction. Heller told 6sqft that he also closed on a three-bedroom at the building a day prior to the deal; unit #9BS sold for $8 million.

The condo joins the Biebers’ real estate portfolio. The couple’s properties include an approximately $25.8 million estate in Los Angeles, a $16.6 million getaway in La Quinta’s Madison Club, and a large lakefront retreat in Ontario, Canada.

160 Leroy Street © Ondel Hylton

Developed by the Ian Schrager Company, 160 Leroy was completed in 2017. Overlooking the Hudson River, the tower is known for its privacy features, including an on-site garage and porte cochere that offer residents privacy.

Photos © Travis Mark

The building includes a 70-foot indoor swimming pool, a fitness center, a spa, and a children’s playroom. Among its notable residents is Michael Rubin, founder and CEO of Fanatics, who purchased a five-bedroom penthouse for about $43 million in 2018 and acquired the adjacent penthouse from Ryan Seacrest in 2022 with plans to combine the two units, according to the Robb Report.

[Listing details: 160 Leroy Street, #10BN at CityRealty]

RELATED:

The post Justin and Hailey Bieber buy West Village condo for $12M first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

HighTechLending is marketing a home equity line of credit (HELOC) targeted at older homeowners as an alternative to traditional reverse mortgages, amid a long-term decline in federally insured loan volume.

In a recent webinar, “Beyond Reverse — Winning the 55+ Borrower,” Paul Fiore, vice president of sales at HighTechLending and a former executive at American Advisors Group, positioned HighTech’s EquitySelect product as one option for borrowers 55 and older who want to tap home equity but are wary of reverse mortgages.

Fiore noted that annual Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) endorsements have fallen “about 78%” from their 2009 peak, now standing at roughly 25,000 to 30,000 loans a year.

“The 55-plus community is doing HELOCs and cash-outs, about a million loans a year,” he said. “If you just sell reverse mortgages today, you’re only capturing 50,000 of the borrowers that over a million are currently transacting in the demographic that you are marketing to.”

Recent data supports Fiore’s claims. Reverse Market Insight (RMI) reported that the top 100 HECM retail lenders logged 2,064 loans in June, a 6% increase from May but down 9.8% year to date. And while retail lender endorsements were up in June, HECM Mortgage-Backed Securities (HMBS) issuance fell to $456 million, ranking as the 10th-lowest month for HMBS issuance since the program began in 2009, according to New View Advisors.

Fiore cited higher interest rates, increased closing costs and ongoing perception issues as reasons many older borrowers who inquire about reverse mortgages ultimately do not close on them. “No matter how much we advertise, no matter how much we educate, the borrowers are choosing different products,” he said.

EquitySelect is structured as a HELOC that can be set up in a first- or second-lien position. According to Fiore’s presentation, line-of-credit sizes can reach up to $4 million in first position and $1 million in second position, with the product generally aimed at borrowers with combined loan-to-value ratios below about 60%.

Borrowers select a minimum payment based on a percentage of the outstanding balance. For borrowers 60 and older, plans range from 1% to 5% annually, and the selected plan is fixed for the life of the loan.

Fiore described EquitySelect as a “non-recourse, non-recast, no prepayment penalty loan” with a 40-year balloon term. It includes a seven-year draw period for first liens and five years for second liens.

Qualification is based on a capped minimum payment rather than a fully amortizing principal-and-interest payment, which changes how debt-to-income ratios are calculated.

“What that means is they will likely qualify for more money than they would have with a traditional mortgage lien, and they might actually qualify in situations where they otherwise would not have,” Fiore said.

As of Thursday, the EquitySelect 1st and 2nd Lien HELOC is now available in Illinois and Michigan, per a company press release.

Fiore framed the product as part of a broader strategy to give loan officers more options for older borrowers. “People buy outcomes, not products,” he said. “If you can have optionality in what you present, it boosts your credibility with the borrower.”

The product mirrors other offerings in the reverse space, including Longbridge Financial‘s HELOC for Seniors and Finance of America’s HomeSafe Second line of credit.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Remodeling contractors remained optimistic in the second quarter of 2026 even as material costs and economic uncertainty delayed larger jobs, according to new data from the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB).

The NAHB Remodeling Market Index (RMI) came in at 61 in Q2 2026, down one point from the prior quarter but solidly above the break-even level of 50, NAHB reported on its Eye on Housing blog. The index has held in the low 60s for the past year and continues to outperform sentiment in both the single-family and multifamily new construction sectors.

The RMI is based on a national survey of professional remodelers who rate current conditions and future expectations for the residential remodeling market as “good,” “fair” or “poor.” Readings above 50 indicate more remodelers view conditions as good than poor.

Lock-in, low inventory and equity keep demand flowing

NAHB economists attributed the resilience of remodeling to several structural tailwinds that matter directly to builders, remodelers and suppliers.

  • Mortgage rate lock-in: With current mortgage rates sitting above the median outstanding rate for existing homeowners, many households are opting to remodel rather than move, especially given lean for-sale inventory.
  • Record home equity: Homeowners are sitting on record-high real estate gains, giving them the capacity to finance kitchen, bath and whole-house projects through cash-out refis, home equity lines or cash.
  • Inventory constraints: Limited existing-home supply and affordability pressures in new construction continue to push demand toward improving the current home rather than trading up.

For residential construction firms with both building and remodeling operations, the data reinforces that remodeling remains a comparative bright spot in a housing market still constrained by rates, prices and regulatory burdens.

Small and mid-size jobs hold up better than big-ticket projects

The RMI’s Current Conditions Index, which averages sentiment for small, medium and large projects, held at 70 in the second quarter, unchanged from Q1.

  • Sentiment for moderately sized projects between $20,000 and $49,999 rose four points to 73.
  • The small projects component (under $20,000) was steady at a strong 74.
  • The large projects component ($50,000 and above) fell three points to 64.

That pattern mirrors what many design-build and remodeling firms have reported anecdotally: smaller tickets are easier for homeowners to greenlight in an uncertain macro environment, while large, discretionary additions and whole-house jobs are facing more scrutiny, scope reductions or delays.

For builders and trades that rely heavily on high-dollar renovation work, the shift toward mid-range and smaller projects may require adjustments in pipeline management, pricing strategy and crew allocation.

Future indicators soften but stay positive

The Future Indicators Index, which aggregates remodelers’ views on leads and backlogs, slipped two points to 52 in Q2, NAHB said. Both components remain just above the 50 threshold:

  • The index for the backlog of remodeling jobs declined two points to 54.
  • The index tracking the rate of leads and inquiries edged down one point to 51.

The modest drop suggests demand is easing from the peak levels seen during the pandemic-era remodeling boom but remains consistent with a solid, sustainable pipeline rather than a cliff in activity.

Inflation and fuel costs pressure margins

Cost and pricing pressures continue to shape project timing and profitability:

  • 74% of remodelers said their suppliers raised material prices since March due to higher fuel costs.
  • Those remodelers reported an average 6.7% increase in material prices over that short period.

NAHB noted that inflation and broader economic uncertainty are driving more project delays, particularly for large jobs. For remodelers and homebuilders with renovation divisions, the data underscores the need to:

  • Tighten estimating and contingencies on long-duration projects
  • Revisit escalation clauses and price-adjustment language in contracts
  • Communicate early with clients about potential cost changes tied to fuel and freight

With operating costs moving higher and homeowners still price sensitive, firms that can manage procurement efficiently and lock in costs where possible will be better positioned to protect margins.

Why this matters for homebuilders and residential construction

NAHB’s baseline forecast calls for remodeling spending to remain “robust” in both the near term and over the long run. For The Builder’s Daily and broader HousingWire homebuilding audience, the RMI results highlight several strategic implications:

  • Counter-cyclical hedge: Remodeling continues to provide diversification for production builders, specialty trades and suppliers facing choppy for-sale demand.
  • Product strategy: Stronger demand in small and mid-range projects favors systems and finishes that support partial kitchen/bath upgrades, energy retrofits and exterior refreshes over full gut rehabs.
  • Land and spec strategy: Builders in supply-constrained markets may see more opportunity in “build and remodel” models, acquisition-rehab programs or partnerships with remodeling firms targeting aging stock.
  • Labor planning: A still-healthy backlog suggests firms should be cautious about cutting crews in remodeling operations, even if new-home starts slow.

For now, NAHB’s latest read on the RMI confirms that remodeling remains one of the most resilient segments in the housing ecosystem, supported by rate lock-in, equity and aging housing stock—even as cost inflation and macro uncertainty test budgets and timelines.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

A federal judge has denied the Federal Trade Commission’s request for a partial summary judgment in its antitrust challenge of Zillow Group’s partnership with Redfin, finding that disputed issues in the case must be resolved at trial.

U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga ruled Wednesday that factual disputes in the antitrust case require a full trial rather than an early decision.

Bloomberg reported that Trenga, who declined to temporarily block the partnership between Zillow and Redfin, said, “Too many disputes exist in the case to decide it before a trial.” The trial is expected to start on Aug. 24.

Zillow released a statement on its website regarding the news: “The FTC asked the court to partially resolve this case before Zillow has the opportunity to present its full evidence at trial — evidence that will demonstrate the pro-competitive effects of this partnership for renters and housing providers. We are pleased with the court’s decision today, and look forward to presenting the full record at trial next month.”

Neither the FTC nor Redfin responded to HousingWire’s requests for comment at the time of publication.

The backstory

The news comes just months after Trenga denied Zillow and Redfin’s motion to dismiss the antitrust lawsuit filed by the FTC and attorneys general from Virginia, Arizona, New York, Connecticut and Washington.

The FTC and several states sued Zillow and Redfin over a February 2025 agreement under which Zillow paid $100 million to become the exclusive provider of multifamily rental listings on Redfin, Rent.com and ApartmentGuide.com, with two optional two-year extensions.

Zillow also operates several rental listing platforms, including Zillow Rentals, HotPads and Trulia.

Originally filed as two separate lawsuits in September 2025 and consolidated in November, the case alleges the agreement effectively paid Redfin to exit the multifamily rental listings market, eliminating it as a competitor.

According to the FTC’s complaint, Redfin also agreed to stop selling multifamily advertising, terminate its existing advertising contracts and transition those customers to Zillow.

The FTC alleges the arrangement effectively combined two of the three largest online apartment listing services and violates federal antitrust and merger laws.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The Dream Finders-Beazer situation has now moved beyond a standard merger-and-acquisition negotiation. It has become a live case study in public company governance, board discretion, shareholder rights, and the limits of process as a defense.

On the surface, this resembles a familiar public-company takeover dispute. One homebuilder has made an all-cash offer for another. The target board says it is evaluating options. The bidder claims the board is not engaging constructively.

Both sides use the language of fiduciary duty, shareholder value, and process.

Beneath that familiar structure, however, lies a more important question: when does a board’s right to manage a sale process become a tool to prevent shareholders from deciding for themselves? That is the issue surrounding Dream Finders Homes’ pursuit of Beazer Homes.

Dream Finders’ latest public statement is not merely an argument about price. It is a call-out on how Beazer’s board is exercising its gatekeeping power. The company is effectively saying that Beazer’s board is not only negotiating hard but also using procedural controls to limit the ability of a credible bidder and a Beazer shareholder to engage directly with the company’s owners.

Boards are supposed to protect shareholders from opportunistic bids, incomplete information, inadequate financing and rushed decisions. They are not supposed to use governance mechanics to insulate themselves from credible proposals that shareholders may reasonably want to consider.

Standstill as a management tool

The most telling issue is the reported 12-month standstill requirement that prevented Dream Finders from accessing due diligence. A standstill can be a legitimate tool. Companies often require bidders who enter a data room to agree not to misuse confidential information, to launch a hostile bid based on inside materials, or to disrupt the process while the board evaluates alternatives.

In a normal context, that is defensible. But a full year is different.

A 12-month standstill is not simply about confidentiality. It can work as a muzzle. It can prevent a bidder from returning to shareholders if the board delays, refuses to engage or steers the process in another direction. That is especially significant when the bidder is already a shareholder.

In that situation, the standstill is not merely a confidentiality agreement. It becomes a governance weapon. If a board requires a yearlong silence period just to allow a bidder into the data room, shareholders should ask whether the purpose is protection or entrenchment. There is a difference between running an orderly process and disabling a competing viewpoint. The practical effect is clear. Dream Finders would be allowed to look under the hood only if it agreed to surrender its ability to pressure the board publicly or go directly to shareholders for a meaningful period. That may be convenient for Beazer’s board. It may reduce noise. It may give directors greater control over the timeline. But the question is whether that control benefits shareholders or merely protects the board’s preferred process.

That is where this dispute becomes broader than Beazer. Public company governance is often discussed in abstract terms. Annual reports and proxy statements speak of independence, ethical conduct, shareholder alignment and disciplined oversight. But governance is not proven in boilerplate. It is proven under pressure.

All-cash at a premium is a bright line

A live premium bid is one of the clearest pressure tests a board can face. When a credible buyer appears with cash, financing support and a premium over the undisturbed trading price, the board’s job is not to make the offer disappear. Nor is it to manage the optics until shareholders lose interest. The board’s job is to determine whether the proposal is genuine, whether better alternatives exist and whether shareholders should be given a clear path to evaluate the choice.

That does not mean every premium bid should be accepted. Boards are not auctioneers with an obligation to sell to the first bidder. A board may conclude that the company’s standalone value is higher. It may be that the timing is poor. It may have other strategic alternatives. It may have legitimate concerns about execution, financing, regulatory approvals, or buyer credibility. But if the board chooses to reject or slow-walk a cash premium offer, it needs to show its work.

That is the second major issue in this dispute: the references to “other interested parties.” Beazer’s board may well be pursuing alternatives. It may have other parties interested in the company. It may be believed that a more attractive transaction is possible. But shareholders deserve to understand whether those alternatives are concrete or theoretical.

Dream Finders is openly challenging Beazer to confirm whether any unnamed parties have submitted a comparable all-cash offer at or above $32 per share, with committed financing support and a clear path to closing. That is a fair question.

In public M&A, “interest” is not a proposal. A phone call is not a bid. A non-binding expression of interest is not a financed offer. Strategic chatter is not the same as value. Shareholders do not own hypothetical upside. They own shares that can be sold, held, voted, or tendered based on real alternatives. If there are other credible bidders, Beazer should be able to say so, at least in general terms, without compromising the process. If there are not, the board is effectively asking shareholders to trust an undefined process over a visible cash proposal.

That is a much harder argument.

Where due diligence meets risk

The reported premium is also central. If the Dream Finders offer represents a 60% to 70% premium over Beazer’s undisturbed trading price, it is not a marginal proposal. It is the kind of offer that requires serious, transparent engagement. Shareholders may still prefer the standalone plan. They may believe that book value, land holdings, future earnings, or cycle timing justify a higher price. But they are entitled to compare that belief with actual cash. This is especially important in the homebuilding sector.

Public homebuilders often trade in complex territory. Book value, land inventory, option exposure, debt, absorptions, gross margins, backlog, cycle risk, and local market mix all matter. A company may look cheap on paper yet be difficult to unlock in practice. Conversely, a builder may trade below book because the market does not believe the assets will generate attractive returns over the cycle.

For asset-heavy companies trading below book value, management teams and boards often argue that public markets are undervaluing the company. Sometimes they are right. But when a strategic buyer appears and offers cash at a substantial premium, the conversation shifts.

The board can no longer rely solely on the premise that the market misunderstands the story. It must explain why shareholders should continue to accept public-market discounts rather than monetize the asset base today. That is the core tension.

Measuring ‘intrinsic value’

Beazer may believe its standalone plan is worth more than Dream Finders’ offer. It may believe the bid opportunistically captures value at the wrong point in the housing cycle. It may believe shareholders would be better served by waiting for rates to normalize, margins to recover, or investor sentiment toward small- and mid-cap builders to improve. Those arguments may be legitimate, but legitimacy requires evidence.

What is the board’s view of intrinsic value? What assumptions underpin that view? What is the probability-weighted outcome compared with cash today? What execution risk is embedded in the standalone plan? How long will shareholders have to wait? What happens if the housing cycle weakens? What happens if capital costs remain elevated? What happens if Beazer continues to trade at a discount despite operational progress? These are the questions shareholders should be asking.

The real issue is not whether $32 is the perfect number. It is whether the board allows shareholders to make a clear comparison between the bid and the alternative. That is why the standstill issue matters so much. A board confident in its standalone plan should not need to impose a broad gag order on a shareholder bidder. It should be willing to test the proposal, run a process, communicate with shareholders, and defend its conclusion. If the offer is inadequate, make that case. If other bidders are real, show enough evidence to establish that. If the standalone plan is superior, explain the math.

But using restrictive process terms to control the narrative invites suspicion. Governance risk often arises when a board’s legal rights and shareholder expectations diverge. Directors may have the authority to manage the process and may have counsel advising them that certain defensive steps are permissible. Yet the fact that something is legally available does not make it persuasive to owners.

Shareholders care less about technical governance language than about practical outcomes. Did the board engage? Did it test the offer? Did it preserve optionality? Did it communicate clearly? Did it allow the owners to make an informed judgment? Or did it hide behind the process? That is why this matter has become a referendum on Beazer’s board as much as on Dream Finders’ bid.

Rules of engagement

Dream Finders’ reservation of rights to nominate directors and re-engage shareholders ahead of Beazer’s 2027 annual meeting is not a throwaway line. It signals that if the board will not run what the bidder views as a real process, Dream Finders may take the question directly to the owners.

That is the classic escalation path in public company control disputes. First comes the proposal. Then the public letter. Then the pressure on the board. Then the possibility of a proxy contest or director nominations. The message is simple: if the board controls the door, shareholders control the board. That is the part every public company should pay attention to.

The modern governance environment is less tolerant of boards that speak the language of shareholder alignment while acting as though shareholders are a constituency to be managed rather than the company’s owners. Investors may not always agree with activists or hostile bidders, but they generally dislike being told to trust a process they cannot assess.

In this case, Dream Finders seeks to portray Beazer’s board as the obstacle to a premium cash exit for shareholders. Beazer, in turn, must position itself as a disciplined fiduciary protecting shareholders from an inadequate or premature offer. The side that wins will likely be the one that presents the more credible case on process, value, and owner choice. For Beazer, the path forward is clear, even if difficult.

If the company has better alternatives, it should demonstrate their legitimacy. If the Dream Finders offer undervalues the business, it should present a convincing valuation framework. If the standstill is necessary, it should explain why a less restrictive agreement would not protect the company. If the board is truly acting in shareholders’ best interests, it should welcome scrutiny rather than rely on procedural opacity.

For Dream Finders, the challenge is also clear. It must continue to prove that its offer is credible, financed, executable, and superior to the alternatives. It must persuade shareholders that this is not merely an opportunistic attempt to buy assets cheaply but a legitimate premium proposal that deserves direct consideration. That is the battle now. Not just price. Not just process. Trust.

Do shareholders trust Beazer’s board to evaluate the bid fairly? Do they trust Dream Finders to close at the proposed price? Do they trust the standalone plan enough to reject cash today? Do they trust references to other interested parties without seeing comparable economics? Those questions will shape the next phase.

Macro implications

The broader lesson for public homebuilders is unmistakable. In an asset-intensive industry where book value, land position and cycle timing can create persistent valuation gaps, boards cannot assume that public market discounts will remain a private frustration. Those discounts invite strategic interest. Once a credible buyer appears, governance shifts from theory to practice.

A proxy statement can say “shareholder-aligned.” A board deck can say “best-in-class governance.” An annual report can say “ethical conduct.” But when a premium cash bidder shows up, the market watches what the board actually does.

Does it engage? Does it negotiate? Does it test the market? Does it explain the math? Does it allow shareholders to choose? Or does it hide behind NDAs, standstills, and process control?

That is why the Dream Finders–Beazer situation matters beyond the two companies. It is a reminder that governance is not a slogan, a committee structure or a paragraph in the proxy. Governance is behavior under pressure. At some point, the question becomes very simple. If shareholders own the company, should they be allowed to decide between the status quo and cash? 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Howard Hanna NYC has added 26 real estate agents as the brokerage continues to expand its Manhattan operations.

The additions include the Andrew Klima Team, which joined from SERHANT. The team closed $58 million in sales across 90 transactions in 2025, according to Howard Hanna, and works in both the Pittsburgh and New York City markets.

Team founder Andrew Klima said the move will help the team serve clients relocating or investing across multiple markets.

“In this industry, agents are often forced to choose between the scale and resources of a large brokerage and the personal support of a family-run firm, but it’s rare to find both under one roof,” he said. “Howard Hanna has built a culture that combines institutional strength with genuine accessibility and care from leadership. For our team, the move creates an opportunity to better serve clients across Pittsburgh and New York City while leveraging a powerful national platform that still feels entrepreneurial, collaborative and personal.”

Howard Hanna NYC also added agents from several competing brokerages, including members of the FAST Advisory Group. Christopher Avesian, James Ferrando and Elizabeth Steele joined from Corcoran.

The brokerage said additional hires have been integrated into existing teams. Bert Johnson’s team added Nadia Sunn and Renee Bulles.

New agents joining the firm also include Alexandra Czapelski, Bess Sullivan and Malik Allen.

Michael Rossi, executive vice president of Howard Hanna NYC, said the additions reflect the brokerage’s growth strategy.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

VantageScore on Wednesday announced the release of VantageScore 5.0, a new tri-bureau credit scoring model that the company says is designed to improve lenders’ ability to assess consumer creditworthiness, particularly for unsecured loans and auto financing.

The new model is available through the three major U.S. credit reporting companies — Equifax, Experian and TransUnion — and is built using post-pandemic consumer credit data. VantageScore said it better reflects changes in borrowing behavior since 2020.

According to the company’s press release, VantageScore 5.0 provides up to a 9% improvement in predictive performance for unsecured lending products — including credit cards, retail cards, personal loans and auto loans — compared with VantageScore 3.0.

“VantageScore 5.0 uses an innovative and simplified credit score model design that minimizes credit score migration, maintaining a more consistent credit score within an ever-changing credit environment,” the release stated. “VantageScore 5.0 also reduces variability across credit bureau files, ensuring 96% of scores remain within a 40-point range across all three bureaus.”

VantageScore claims that the new model, which is “optimized for unsecured lending and auto loans,” is the only nationwide tri-bureau credit score currently trained on post-pandemic consumer loan performance.

The company said the model incorporates new patent-pending credit attributes designed to provide lenders with more detailed insights into borrower risk. It also said the model is intended to produce more consistent credit scores over time and reduce differences in scores generated from the three national credit bureaus.

“The credit landscape has evolved rapidly,” Andrada Pacheco, VantageScore’s executive vice president and chief data scientist, said in a statement. “VantageScore 5.0 is at the forefront of a new generation of VantageScore credit scoring models built on today’s challenges and tomorrow’s opportunities.”

The release comes as competition in the credit scoring market has intensified. Federal housing regulators have recently expanded the use of newer credit scoring models in mortgage lending, including VantageScore 4.0 and FICO 10T.

This article was written by Sarah Wolak and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

WNC & Associates has closed a $210 million Low-Income Housing Tax Credit fund that will finance 18 affordable housing communities across 13 states, adding or preserving more than 2,000 rental homes.

The vehicle, WNC Institutional Tax Credit Fund 59, L.P., will invest in 2,015 units across Alaska, California, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Nevada and Texas, the company announced.

The portfolio includes seven new-construction communities and 11 preservation deals, two of which involve historic rehabilitations. Five of the properties will serve seniors, while 13 will provide family housing.

For homebuilders and developers, the fund represents another pool of equity capital targeting affordable projects at a time when higher rates, construction costs and tighter capital markets are squeezing project feasibility. LIHTC equity remains one of the few scalable tools available to fill gaps in the capital stack for income-restricted rentals.

Fund 59 will primarily use LIHTCs but also includes properties leveraging Energy Tax Credits and Historic Tax Credits. Layering multiple credit types has become increasingly common as sponsors work to cover rising hard costs and finance energy upgrades that are now embedded in many state allocation plans.

WNC framed the fund as part of a broader response to the national housing shortage. Citing National Low Income Housing Coalition data, the company noted a 7.2 million-home gap in affordable and available rental units for extremely low-income renters.

Founded in 1971, Irvine, California-based WNC and its affiliates have acquired about $21.7 billion in assets across 49 states, including more than 1,770 affordable rental properties serving over 1 million residents, according to the announcement. The firm said it has partnered with more than 400 developers and 175 institutional investors.

The fund is a potential capital source for for-sale builders with affiliated multifamily arms or those partnering on mixed-use or mixed-income communities where LIHTC rentals are part of a larger master plan.

As federal and state policymakers consider expanding LIHTC and related incentives, national funds like WNC’s are positioned to deploy capital quickly into shovel-ready affordable projects, including those embedded in larger master-planned communities where homebuilders play a lead role.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

After shuttering last year and a brief stint as a light installation, Macy’s former Downtown Brooklyn flagship will become a massive five-floor “experiential destination.” United American Land on Monday unveiled plans for BKX, a 440,000-square-foot retail hub at 422 Fulton Street. The project, the largest block of retail space available in New York City, could accommodate “flagship retail, immersive entertainment, food halls, destination dining, wellness concepts, cultural programming, and large-format branded experiences,” according to the developers.

The light installation at the former Macy’s Downtown Brooklyn flagship. Credit: Downtown Brooklyn Partnership

After closing in January 2025, Macy’s transformed into an interactive light installation that pulsed along with the sounds of Fulton Street. The exhibition ran through March of that year and featured street sounds, including music, conversations, traffic, pigeons, crosswalk signals, and subway noise, which controlled the light patterns.

More than a year later, the building is set to welcome shoppers once again, this time as a large-scale experiential destination. The project team, which also includes The Jackson Group and Dreamscape Retail & Entertainment, describes BKX as one of the city’s “largest and most ambitious retail developments.”

“When we acquired this property, we saw an opportunity to reimagine one of New York’s most iconic sites for the next generation,” Albert Laboz, principal of United American Land, said.

“Rather than pursuing a traditional retail redevelopment, we’re creating a destination that reflects how people want to spend time today—bringing together entertainment, dining, retail and community under one roof.”

BKX will be designed to accommodate flagship retailers, entertainment venues, immersive attractions, food and beverage concepts, and emerging brands seeking a high-profile urban location. Potential uses include multi-level anchor spaces and curated specialty retail, giving brands flexibility to create customized flagship locations.

Dreamscape is working with experiential design firm iCrave to design BKX’s central atrium, a shared gathering space intended to serve as the centerpiece of the destination.

Dreamscape is behind projects including Pier 17 at the South Street Seaport, the Rio Las Vegas hotel and casino, and Nashville’s Arcade shopping complex, according to Curbed. iCrave has worked on projects including Las Vegas’ Sphere, TSX Broadway in Times Square, and Mercado Little Spain in Hudson Yards.

“BKX represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create a first-of-its-kind urban entertainment destination,” Joshua Strauss, president of Retail & Entertainment at Dreamscape, said.

“Consumers today are looking for more than a traditional shopping experience. They’re excited by places that blend retail, entertainment, dining, culture and community, and BKX has been envisioned to meet that demand under one roof, at a scale that simply doesn’t exist elsewhere in New York.”

Located above one of the city’s busiest transit hubs, BKX will have direct access to 11 subway lines and the Long Island Rail Road. Thousands of commuters and visitors pass through the area on a daily basis. Leasing is currently underway.

RELATED:

The post Macy’s former Downtown Brooklyn flagship to become five-floor ‘experiential’ retail destination first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Purchase mortgage demand gained momentum in June as overall mortgage rate-lock activity increased and lenders continued adjusting to a higher interest rate environment, according to Optimal Blue’s June 2026 Market Advantage report, released Thursday.

The report found total mortgage rate-lock volume increased 10% from May and 15% from a year earlier. Purchase lock volume rose 10% month over month and 14% year over year, reaching its highest level since early spring. Purchase loans accounted for more than 81% of all rate locks during the month.

Refinance activity also remained stable, with refinances representing 19% of total lock volume. Cash-out refinance volume increased 11% from May and 10% from a year earlier, while rate-and-term refinances rose 6% month over month and 32% year over year.

“June wasn’t defined by a single headline number. Purchase demand strengthened, refinance activity held up and pull-through improved after softening in May,” Mike Vough, Optimal Blue’s senior vice president of corporate strategy, said in a statement. “Together, those trends point to a market that is battle-tested and that has adapted to a higher-for-longer rate environment.”

The report also showed continued changes in loan composition. Conforming mortgages accounted for 49% of total production in June, remaining below the 50% threshold for the second consecutive month. Non-conforming loans grew to more than 19% of production, their highest share in several years, while non-qualified mortgages represented 9% of total lock volume, up 1.4 percentage points from a year ago.

Government-backed lending remained a significant portion of the market, with Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans making up nearly 19% of production and U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) loans accounting for almost 13%.

Mortgage rates were little changed during the month. Optimal Blue’s Mortgage Market Indices 30-year conforming fixed rate rose 1 basis point to 6.45%, though it remained 22 basis points below its level a year earlier. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note ended June at 4.44%, down 1 basis point from May, widening the spread between the Treasury yield and the 30-year conforming mortgage rate to 201 basis points.

On the secondary market, agency mortgage-backed securities executions declined for a second straight month, falling to 40% of funded loan sales, while best-efforts executions increased to 3%.

“We saw lenders continue to fine-tune execution strategy in June,” Vough said. “Agency MBS executions declined again while best-efforts activity increased, showing that lenders are evaluating all potential loan sale options.”

The report also found signs of improving borrower performance. Purchase pull-through rates rose to 81.4% after declining in May, while refinance pull-through increased to 71.1%.

First-time homebuyers accounted for 45% of conforming purchase locks, nearly 3 percentage points higher than a year earlier. Average debt-to-income ratios remained below 2025 levels across conforming, FHA and VA loans, while the average borrower credit score held steady at 731.

The average locked loan amount increased to just over $399,000, approaching record highs as home prices continued to appreciate and purchase activity remained concentrated in higher-cost markets.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Zillow has rolled out Zillow Pro, a nationwide premium membership designed to give real estate agents direct visibility into their clients’ activity on Zillow and tools to act on those signals.

The launch brings Zillow’s consumer data and collaboration tools directly into agents’ day-to-day workflows at a time when home sales are on track for another flat year and mortgage rates hover near 6.5%.

With 235 million average monthly unique users and 70% of actual buyers and sellers in the U.S. using Zillow, the company said most agents’ past clients are already on the platform but often without a clear next step toward a transaction.

Zillow Pro, announced Thursday by Zillow Group, Inc., is available to any agent, whether or not they currently advertise on Zillow. Nearly 20,000 agents used Zillow Pro during its beta period, according to the company announcement. Buyers working with Zillow Pro agents were 80% more likely to meet their agent in person and 50% more likely to move forward in their search, Zillow said.

“Real estate runs on relationships, and we see time and again the agents who win are the ones who show up at the right moment with the right information,” said Cynthia Taylor, senior vice president of product at Zillow, in the release. “Now any agent can have the tools and visibility to do that across their entire business.”

How Zillow Pro works

The core of the membership is My Agent, a collaboration tool that pulls agents into the consumer’s Zillow experience. Agents can invite any buyer or seller in their network to connect on Zillow. Once a consumer accepts a My Agent invitation, the agent gains real-time insight into that shopper’s behavior — including what they are browsing, saving and searching in their area.

Those signals are intended to help agents prioritize outreach and tailor their communication. Zillow said My Agent data connects with Follow Up Boss, the customer relationship management (CRM) platform it owns, to automatically surface high-intent contacts and suggest messages. Consumers who connect through My Agent are converting at more than four times the rate of those with inferred relationships, according to the company.

On the consumer side, shoppers who accept an invitation see their agent branded across Zillow listings in their local market and can message or book a tour with that agent directly from their search experience.

CRM integration and ‘Likely to List’ signals

Zillow is positioning Zillow Pro as a way to merge its audience data with CRM workflows. With a membership, agents can send My Agent invitations to any contact in their Follow Up Boss database. The goal is to keep agents visible to past clients and sphere contacts who may quietly be returning to the market.

A new premium feature called “Likely to List” uses artificial intelligence to tag properties in an agent’s Follow Up Boss database that may be preparing to come to market. Those prompts are designed to give listing agents a reason to re-engage with former clients or leads who could be considering a sale.

Branding and positioning in a slow market

Zillow Pro includes a premium Agent Profile that allows for enhanced branding with custom visuals and video. Zillow said the package is designed as a full system for branding, outreach and workflow, rather than a standalone lead product.

For housing professionals, the launch underscores how portal data is increasingly being integrated into CRM and marketing automation. As transaction volumes remain subdued, retaining and reactivating past clients has become a priority. Tools that show when a known contact starts browsing homes again, or appears likely to list, can help agents focus time and marketing spend on the highest-intent relationships.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Homebuyers and sellers are beginning to treat ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs) like a genie in a bottle. They often trust AI recommendations implicitly because the suggestions are the result of personalized, deep-diving research and an authoritative verification process.

The phenomenon is ramping so quickly that agents are losing leads they’ve nurtured for years to competitors recommended by artificial intelligence (AI). However, this brave new world is also an opportunity to win those recommendations for yourself and revitalize your business. 

If you know what to do.

Below is a breakdown of how to transition your digital strategy to AI-first visibility, ranging from simple DIY steps to advanced expert tactics.

Realtor AEO vs GEO

Put simply, Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) for real estate agents is designing your digital footprint so that AI will recommend you when people Google for local realtors. 

Google search for "who is the best real estate agent in sugar land texas."

Put more technically, it’s the practice of structuring verifiable digital signals so AI systems can confidently identify:

  • Who the agent is
  • Where they operate
  • What they specialize in
  • Whether they are trustworthy

Realtor Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) is the same process, but for LLMs. It aims for recommendations from ChatGPT and Gemini, rather than Google’s AI snippet. 

Both AEO and GEO operate under very similar processes. They also share a similar foundation to traditional, local real estate SEO. 

For that reason, I’ve sourced these hacks from authorities with that background who are pivoting into optimizing for AI recommendations.

DIY vs expert real estate agent AEO/GEO hacks

Look at AEO as a sliding scale. You can definitely handle some basics on your own, but if you want to dial your visibility up to the max, you’ll need some technical expertise.

I’ve broken these hacks down into what you can tackle yourself versus what’s better left to the pros. 

Use this to see where you’re at. You might find you’re fine flying solo for now, or you might realize it’s time to call in an expert to handle the heavy lifting.

10 DIY hacks to boost AI recommendations

If you serve a rural area or specialize in highly particular kinds of property, you may be able to complete the steps below to enjoy the lion’s share of recommendations.

  1. Get an AI visibility audit from a real estate AEO/GEO company.
  2. Pick one version of your personal name, brokerage name, business address and phone number, and add them everywhere.
  3. Pick your real, local core areas and repeat them consistently, instead of saying you serve the whole state.
  4. Write one solid bio paragraph and paste it on Google, Zillow, Realtor.com, your site, etc.
  5. Fill out your Google Business Profile completely: categories, services, areas, hours and description.
  6. Post to your Google profile every two to three months—market updates, neighborhood notes, open-house recaps—using real place names naturally.
  7. Reverse engineer real estate AEO strategies from expert marketing firms that publish some of their secret sauce. 
  8. When you ask for a review, nudge for specifics without scripting it: “If you mention the neighborhood/city and your generation, that helps future buyers/sellers.”
  9. Reply to every review like a professional, especially negative ones.
  10. Add an “About Page” that answers four things clearly: who you are, where you work, what you specialize in and real, verifiable credibility signals, like links to awards, local involvement and media mentions.

5 expert hacks to boost AI recommendations

This section covers strategies that tech-savvy agents or real estate AEO firms can handle.

  1. Create an AI Info Page on your website, specifically for LLMs to read.
  2. Coding schema markup to promote entity verification and social proof verification.
  3. Perform a deep-diving citation audit and cleanup across the wider web.
  4. Write LLM-friendly PR releases for the most authoritative sources.
  5. Secure guest spots on local podcasts or high-authority news features to place your name alongside established local brands, proving your authority to AI through association.

Benjamin Wagner is the Chief Marketing Officer at Inbound Real Estate Marketing. 
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Can mortgage rates get to 7% or above this year, given the continued nature of the Iran conflict? While not part of my forecast in 2026, the Iranian conflict has changed a lot of things. However, even with all the drama this year, mortgage rates have still not reached 7%.

Today I’ll explain why we haven’t seen those levels and what would need to happen for that to occur. 

10-year yield and mortgage rates

In the 2026 HousingWire forecast, I anticipated the following ranges:

  • Mortgage rates between 5.75% and 6.75%
  • The 10-year yield fluctuating between 3.80% and 4.60%

My high-level forecast for the 10-year yield of 4.60% was incorrect this year. Even though we are at this level today, the only reason we are here is the Iran conflict, which, of course, was not part of my forecast.

After watching how the bond market has behaved this year — even with better economic data and rising inflation — it is likely we would never have touched 4.60% without the Iran conflict. This morning we hit 4.60% again after the U.S. renewed bombing Iran last night, mirroring the last time we were above 4.60% this year, when headlines about the Iranian conflict prompted bond traders to sell.  

While oil prices are up from the recent low of $68, they’re not even over $80 today, but the 10-year yield is close to yearly highs. I have explained how this has more to do with the Federal Reserve becoming hawkish. However, since a lot of the Fed members made the conflict with Iran a huge part of their hawkish stance, I can understand why some people thought mortgage rates might go much lower when oil was below $70.

chart visualization

I believe the Fed being more hawkish is the bigger story here, and the conflict heating up again has just made their stance firmer. As I wrote yesterday, the Fed has had ample chances to talk down their hawkish stance with oil prices lower, and they haven’t.

So, can rates get above 7%?

We should now think of the base mortgage rate levels as 6.50%-6.75%, and the 10-year yield base level should be 4.46%-4.48%. These levels assume a lot of hawkishness is already priced into the markets.

So what happens if the Iran conflict gets worse? I don’t believe the conflict will be the main variable in driving rates higher. To do that, the Fed needs to be hawkish and the economic data has to firm up, but even with that, I can only go 0.375%-0.437% higher on mortgage rates above the peak forecast of 6.75% because mortgage spreads have improved so much.

chart visualization

While there is a pathway to higher rates due to the conflict, a lot would need to happen to get rates above 7% and keep them there. Obviously, this conflict could last indefinitely, but, to me, the economic data and labor are more key now with the Fed’s more hawkish stance.

Conclusion

For mortgage rates to get above 7% this year we need a lot to happen. Also, the Federal Reserve needs to be okay with rates going above 7% and Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh has stated that policy is too restrictive for housing to grow. For now, if these conflict headlines and attacks can end and we can just focus on economic data, rates getting above 7% is unlikely. At the same time, rates getting back to 6% is also unlikely unless some Fed hawks turn dovish.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The Midtown Manhattan high-rise where two structural columns buckled on Tuesday was deemed stable on Wednesday, and the New York City Department of Buildings said crews had shored up several floors as some neighboring evacuations were lifted, according to updates from the agency and Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s office.

The building at 235 East 42nd Street, the former global headquarters of pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc., is in the middle of one of the largest office-to-apartment conversion projects in New York City’s history, a plan to turn the 37-story tower into roughly 1,600 residential units. The trouble began just before 8 a.m. Tuesday, when the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) received a call about bricks falling from the structure. Construction workers on the 21st floor reported that support columns were beginning to give way, and inspectors later found two bent steel columns, multiple cracks and sagging floors. No injuries were reported, and officials said all workers were accounted for.

The incident triggered a large emergency response, mass evacuations of nearby buildings and street closures on East 42nd and East 43rd Streets between Second and Third Avenues, in a stretch of Midtown near Grand Central Terminal that draws commuters, residents and tourists. The tower sits just blocks from the Chrysler Building and United Nations headquarters.

By Tuesday evening, Department of Buildings Commissioner Ahmed Tigani said temporary shoring had begun, with jacks installed and new steel put in place to stabilize the structure. He said inspectors reached the 21st floor and were confident the emergency work was securing the building, adding that an independent third-party engineer had been brought in to review the situation. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Planning Leila Bozorg said a six-person team inspected the building floor by floor and found no additional movement, calling it an encouraging sign as crews continued working toward the 37th floor.

On Wednesday, Mayor Mamdani said at an unrelated press conference that the building had shown no further movement and that eight floors, from the 18th through the 23rd, had already been shored up by late morning. He said crews would continue working through the day to reach the roof and then reinforce floors down to the ninth. Some evacuation orders affecting neighboring buildings were lifted Wednesday morning, although four nearby buildings remained under vacate orders.

The developer, MetroLoft, said Wednesday that it had identified the problem and was working with the Department of Buildings to complete repairs, maintaining that the building was never at risk of collapse and that no debris fell to the street. Developer Nathan Berman previously described the damage as a routine construction issue and told reporters the buckling was likely caused by additional weight placed on the columns.

City inspection records point to a more serious preliminary assessment. Department of Buildings comments attached to the incident indicate an investigator believed insufficient steel reinforcement, contrary to approved construction plans, may have contributed to the columns buckling. The department ordered all construction work halted except for emergency stabilization performed under full-time supervision by licensed engineers and construction superintendents. Once emergency repairs are completed, officials said a comprehensive structural assessment will be conducted before any additional construction is permitted.

The tower had already attracted regulatory attention before Tuesday’s incident. Public records show the site accumulated roughly two dozen complaints over the past year involving falling material and alleged unsafe working conditions. The developer and property owner are also defendants in an active lawsuit filed by a construction worker who alleges he suffered serious and permanent injuries after a fall at the building in September 2025.

For New York’s commercial real estate market, the incident comes at a pivotal time. Office-to-residential conversions have become a central strategy for addressing the city’s housing shortage while repurposing aging office towers with elevated vacancy rates. The redevelopment of 235 East 42nd Street has been one of the highest-profile examples of that effort. A structural failure during construction is likely to increase scrutiny of engineering oversight, construction practices and regulatory inspections as additional conversion projects move forward.

For now, city officials remain focused on fully stabilizing the building and completing a floor-by-floor structural review. The cause remains under investigation, and the New York City Department of Buildings has indicated a full inquiry will follow once emergency stabilization work is complete. Portions of Midtown surrounding the site are expected to remain partially closed while repairs continue.

JBizNews Desk | New York

© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or distribution without written permission is prohibited.

On:

Riders on 50 bus routes across New York City could see their commutes cut by up to six minutes under a new proposal aimed at boosting bus speeds. Mayor Zohran Mamdani, Gov. Kathy Hochul, and the MTA on Wednesday released “Next Stop: Fast Buses, Better Service,” a plan outlining service upgrades that transit officials say will improve speed, reliability, and the rider experience citywide. Through a combination of service changes, traffic enforcement upgrades, and road redesigns, officials say the plan could reduce travel times by 20 percent across at least 50 bus corridors.

Photo credit: Susan Watts/Office of Governor Kathy Hochul

Buses serve as a lifeline for millions of New Yorkers, with more than 2.75 million trips taken daily across the city’s bus network, which spans roughly 1,600 miles of city streets.

However, despite their critical role, the city’s buses remain among the slowest in the nation. The average city bus travels at just 8 miles per hour, and more than 90 percent of city streets with bus routes lack dedicated bus lanes. According to the plan, buses spend 21 percent of their time stopped at traffic lights.

Despite significant investments in the bus system in recent years, the city says more work remains. The plan, a joint effort between the city’s Department of Transportation and the MTA, aims to address longstanding challenges such as slow speeds and unreliable service by setting a series of ambitious goals for the coming years.

Rendering of a future rapid transit corridor in NYC. Credit: NYC Mayor’s Office

“Every day, millions of New Yorkers rely on buses to get around this city, but for far too long, making their journeys faster and their lives easier has seemed out of reach. That all changes today,” Hochul said.

“New York is in the midst of a transit renaissance, with historic investments being made to improve the lifeblood of our city,” she added. “Now, working with Mayor Mamdani, we are advancing a bold and ambitious plan to move buses faster, dramatically expand bus priority, reduce delays and make our bus system the envy of the world.”

Map of the 50 priority corridors. Credit: NYC Mayor’s Office

A central component of the plan is improving speeds on 50 “priority corridors,” which currently include 25 of the city’s slowest bus routes. These corridors were selected based on where riders experience the greatest delays, ridership levels, on-time performance, trip length, and access to other forms of public transit.

Many of the selected corridors have ongoing projects to improve bus infrastructure, such as Flatbush Avenue and Linden Boulevard in Brooklyn, and Madison Avenue and 34th Street in Manhattan. Just last month, the DOT unveiled a proposal for a dedicated 63-block bus lane stretching from Watts Street in Soho to 58th Street in Midtown.

Of the 50 priority corridors, the city would designate five as “rapid bus corridors,” prioritizing routes in historically underserved areas. These routes would feature bus-only infrastructure such as busways, fully separated lanes, or center-running lanes that use transit signal priority at intersections and limit cross traffic.

According to the plan, rapid bus corridors across the country and throughout the Americas have been shown to expand job opportunities near stations, reduce business vacancies, and increase development investment.

Map of the 5 rapid bus corridors. Credit: NYC Mayor’s Office

Building on the center-running bus lane project on Flatbush Avenue, the city would deliver new rapid bus service along the full length of the avenue by 2030. On Northern Boulevard in Queens, the DOT and MTA will engage residents to study options for future rapid bus service.

In the Bronx, the agencies will build on the Tremont Avenue Busway and launch community engagement efforts to explore new rapid bus options aimed at improving cross-borough travel.

Later this year, the agencies will launch engagement efforts to explore rapid bus options along Church Avenue, Linden Boulevard, New Lots Avenue, and Conduit Avenue, including connections to John F. Kennedy International Airport. The agencies will also study potential rapid bus upgrades on Utica Avenue in Brooklyn.

Another major component of the plan is modernizing the city’s bus fleet. Fully funded through the MTA’s 2025–2029 Capital Program, the agency will purchase roughly 2,500 new buses, replacing about 40 percent of its aging fleet.

The MTA will also introduce “all-door” boarding in 2027 following the complete transition to the OMNY tap-and-go fare payment system, allowing riders to pay and board through all doors of the bus rather than only the front. The change will reduce the amount of time buses spend at stops, helping them move more efficiently throughout the city.

Transit officials had previously been hesitant to implement all-door boarding, citing concerns that it could lead to increased fare evasion, according to amNY. The city’s bus system has one of the highest fare evasion rates among major transit systems worldwide.

However, as the city pilots a new fare enforcement system using “onboard validation devices,” the MTA is moving forward with the program.

Bus stops will also become safer, more comfortable, and more accessible. The MTA will expand its bus stop accessibility program to reach 65 stops per year by 2030 and install 300 new bus shelters by 2028. It will also add seating at 875 bus stops annually, ensuring every feasible stop has seating by 2035.

The agency will also plant 30 trees at bus stops this year and pilot shelter design improvements aimed at combating extreme heat. Ninety new real-time passenger information displays will be installed this year, expanding to 2,900 displays citywide by 2030.

To keep bus lanes free of illegal traffic, the MTA will expand its Automated Camera Enforcement (ACE) system. The technology has increased bus speeds by as much as 30 percent while reducing collisions by 20 percent. To build on these improvements, the MTA and DOT will expand bus-mounted ACE to 25 additional routes each year in 2026 and 2027.

The agencies will also install 200 additional stationary bus lane cameras by 2027, while the NYPD will expand targeted bus lane enforcement from 14 to 20 corridors starting this year.

Working alongside the Mayor’s Office of Mass Engagement and other city agencies, the DOT and MTA will host community events, conduct surveys, and collaborate with advocacy organizations and community groups before projects begin. These efforts aim to put bus riders at the center of conversations surrounding upcoming upgrades.

The two agencies will publicly release performance data within six to 12 months after projects are completed, assessing impacts on travel times, reliability, and rider experience while identifying opportunities for further improvements.

Wednesday’s announcement raises questions about the status of one of the mayor’s campaign pledges of making buses fast and free. While the mayor has advanced other campaign priorities, including universal childcare and a rent freeze for the city’s rent-stabilized tenants, efforts to deliver free and faster bus service have yet to move forward.

During the press conference, Mamdani was asked whether the “Next Stop” plan would delay his broader goal of making buses free. He said the administration remains committed to that pledge and that the new bus plan will deliver the “fast” part of his promise.

“I’ve been very clear with New Yorkers that my commitment is to make buses fast and free,” he said. “Today, we stand together on how we deliver the fast.”

“I want to be very clear that that speed is something New Yorkers can depend on and see on the bus, and also the investments we’re making around the whole bus system,” he added. “We’ll continue not only to believe, but to work towards making our buses free as well.”

RELATED:

The post New York unveils plan to speed up NYC buses across 50 priority corridors first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

A little more than a month into a hostile homebuilder takeover saga that has not quite reached midsummer, Dream Finders Homes’ pursuit of Beazer Homes is beginning to resemble a Shakespearean tale of unrequited love.

The ardent suitor has returned again. And again. The latest offering is richer: $32 per share in cash, up 24% from the $25.75 proposal Dream Finders made public in May and, by the bidder’s calculation, 70% above Beazer’s undisturbed May 8 share price.

The object of its affection still will not agree to a meeting.

Not, at least, without conditions.

Beazer’s July 8 response to Dream Finders’ latest proposal reveals a contest that has become more complicated than a bidder repeatedly raising its price and a target repeatedly saying no.

In fact, Beazer did not reject the $32 offer outright.

Instead, the Atlanta-based builder said it had received interest from “additional parties regarding a range of potential transactions” and was evaluating those possibilities against its standalone strategy. It also disclosed that it had previously given Dream Finders three conditions for opening discussions: raise the price, drop a demand for exclusive negotiations, and sign a customary confidentiality and standstill agreement.

Dream Finders met the first two conditions. The third condition has now become the fault line.

What that means is that the next phase of this contest turns on something other than whether Dream Finders will keep bidding against itself. At $32, the pressure now runs in both directions.

Beazer’s board faces a higher burden to demonstrate that remaining independent — or pursuing one of the other alternatives it says it is considering — offers shareholders greater prospective value than cash in hand.

Dream Finders, meanwhile, faces a question that grows more pressing with each increase in its offer: What, precisely, can it do with Beazer that Beazer cannot do for itself, and will those improvements justify what Dream Finders is now prepared to pay?

Those are the questions that will shape what comes next [and we’ll take them up in a Part 2 installment on this analysis tomorrow].

First, however, the two companies have to get into the same room.

Five offers, but a more helpful approach

Dream Finders’ latest public presentation fills in a bidding chronology that stretches back five months.

In early February, Dream Finders privately proposed paying $28.50 per share in cash. It raised that proposal to $29 in March. On May 5, it submitted the $25.75 proposal that became public six days later and turned a private courtship into a hostile pursuit.

That $25.75 figure has served as the public benchmark ever since. But it may not be the most useful number for understanding how the negotiation has evolved.

Longtime homebuilding equity analyst Dan Oppenheim regards the earlier $29 private proposal as the more relevant reference point. Seen from that perspective, Dream Finders’ June 22 move to $29.25 carried a message beyond the extra quarter per share.

With that communication, Dream Finders signaled it was prepared to move.

The offer went above its previous private proposal and, without abandoning the hostile campaign, shifted the tone toward something more constructive:

We are not simply trying to pressure you with a lower public bid. We are prepared to find a price at which you will engage.

“I think the message from that one was, ‘We’re not trying to play games here. This is higher than where we were in March. Can we talk about this?’” Oppenheim said.

That progression may help explain why Beazer’s response changed.

The company had rejected the earlier approaches. After the $29.25 proposal, it instead told Dream Finders what would be required to begin discussions: a higher price, abandonment of the exclusivity demand, and a confidentiality and standstill agreement.

Dream Finders then went to $32 and dropped exclusivity.

The price increase therefore did more than raise the prospective payout to Beazer shareholders. It signaled to investors and directors that Dream Finders was prepared to negotiate upward and put a number on the table that could not as easily be dismissed as a hostile tactic.

“From a process standpoint, it is higher than the $29 offer in March and communicates the message that Dream Finders truly wants to engage to complete a transaction rather than simply pursuing an opportunistic transaction,” Oppenheim said. “As it relates to the consideration, $32 is close to as high as BZH has traded since coming out of the downturn/GFC.”

That places the offer in a different context than Dream Finders’ preferred comparison to Beazer’s $18.77 undisturbed May 8 closing price. The bidder can fairly call $32 a 70% premium to that price.

Beazer’s board must also contend with another fact: Investors in the public market have valued the company more highly for only brief periods over the past 15 years.

The $32 offer, Oppenheim said, is now “more helpful, more productive,” and steps up the pressure on Beazer. The company can still decide that another transaction or its standalone strategy offers shareholders more value. But the number has become attractive enough that an outright rejection requires a more substantive case.

“This may be viewed as more compelling by investors as it is 1) a 10% premium to the $29 offer in March, 2) a 16.7% premium to yesterday’s closing price, and 3) nearly as high as Beazer has traded in over 15 years,” Oppenheim said. “While $32 per share would still be approximately 25% below Beazer’s book value as of March 31st, other recent transactions — Landsea et al — have shown that managements and boards can no longer view book value as a floor in a potential sale transaction.”

That, in turn, is why the standstill and Beazer’s reference to other alternatives now matter so much.

The standstill is more than a trifling matter

The immediate obstacle between the companies is no longer the exclusivity requirement Dream Finders had previously attached to its proposal. Dream Finders dropped that requirement.

Nor is it clear that price alone is preventing engagement. Beazer had asked Dream Finders for an improved proposal, and Dream Finders responded with $32.

What remains is Beazer’s insistence that Dream Finders sign a confidentiality and standstill agreement.

Standstill agreements are a familiar part of M&A processes. A target company that opens confidential information to a potential buyer commonly seeks restrictions on what that party can do with the information and on the actions it can take while diligence and negotiations proceed.

The duration matters, however.

Dream Finders characterizes Beazer’s requested agreement as a 12-month standstill that would prevent it from taking its proposal directly to shareholders if the two sides fail to reach a transaction. A year would also extend the restrictions through Beazer’s next director-nomination cycle.

That’s more than a minor procedural point in a hostile contest.

Once a bidder goes public because the target will not engage, outreach to the target’s shareholders becomes a standard part of the campaign. Unlike a friendly transaction negotiated privately between two companies, a hostile bidder seeks, in part, to persuade the target’s owners that its proposal deserves consideration.

The board sits at the center of that process. Management acts under the board’s authority; directors, in turn, are accountable to shareholders. As the contest unfolds, pressure can shift from shareholders to directors and from directors to management.

A 12-month standstill would not merely create a quiet period for diligence. Depending on its precise terms, it could prevent Dream Finders from pursuing other avenues to influence Beazer’s governance during the coming cycle, including the possibility of nominating directors.

Beazer’s public filings set the calendar for shareholder nominations. A 12-month standstill would extend beyond that window, meaning Dream Finders could surrender that option before knowing whether private engagement would produce a transaction.

That does not mean Dream Finders has decided to pursue a director slate. It means the standstill could eliminate its ability to do so.

Oppenheim called Beazer’s insistence on the provision “savvy” from the target company’s standpoint. The description need not imply anything improper.

Beazer has an obvious interest in controlling a process it now says involves multiple potential alternatives and in preventing any one participant from gaining leverage unavailable to others. Dream Finders has an equally obvious interest in preserving the tools available to a hostile bidder if private engagement leads nowhere.

That makes the disagreement substantive rather than semantic.

Beazer says Dream Finders wants to engage “under unilateral terms.” Dream Finders says Beazer is demanding a restriction that could neutralize its ability to continue the campaign.

Both descriptions can be true from the perspective of the party making them.

“Additional parties” does not equal ‘white knight’ competing bid

Another phrase in Beazer’s response deserves equally careful reading. The company said it has “received interest from additional parties regarding a range of potential transactions.”

That does come across as news. It is not, however, the same thing as saying Beazer has another offer to buy the company.

Beazer did not say it has received another whole-company acquisition proposal. It did not say another party has offered more than $32. It did not say any alternative before the board would deliver more immediate cash value to shareholders.

“Additional parties” and a “range of potential transactions” can encompass a much broader field.

Those possibilities could include another strategic buyer. They could also involve a capital investment, a land-banking arrangement, an asset or regional transaction, or another structure that releases capital or changes Beazer’s balance-sheet economics without selling the entire company. The ambiguity in the phrasing leaves the issue open to conjecture as to what and who those “additional parties” are.

That does not make Beazer’s disclosure meaningless.

Its board has publicly notified shareholders that Dream Finders is not the only path under review. Beazer says other parties have signed the confidentiality and standstill agreements that it is asking Dream Finders to accept.

The distinction is that shareholders do not yet have enough information to compare those alternatives to $32 in cash. That comparison is a burden that falls increasingly on the Beazer board.

The result is a takeover contest that has entered a new phase.

Dream Finders has done two of the three things Beazer said it would require for engagement. It raised its price and dropped exclusivity. What remains is a disagreement over a standstill that could materially limit the bidder’s leverage if talks go nowhere.

Meanwhile, Beazer has disclosed enough about other interests to make clear that its board is evaluating alternatives — but not enough for shareholders to know whether any of them offer value comparable to $32 in cash.

So the not-quite-midsummer saga continues. The suitor has returned with more. The object of its pursuit has not said yes. But this time, it has not quite said no, either.

What happens next may depend on whether the two companies can get into the same room. What happens after that raises an even harder set of questions.

Tomorrow: At $32, what does Beazer have to prove about its future – and what does Dream Finders have to prove about its ability to fix what it wants to buy?

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Buckling columns at the former Pfizer headquarters this week forced evacuations across seven Midtown East blocks.

The incident raises new questions about office-to-residential conversion, one of several tools the city has used to add housing. It is also a tool Mayor Zohran Mamdani leaned into because it fit his affordability narrative.

Mamdani has framed housing as his central promise. He has paired headline-grabbing ideas like reviving the Sunnyside Yard megaproject with more incremental tools already on the books.

Office conversions fall into the second category. The mechanism predates his tenure and builds on former Mayor Eric Adams’ City of Yes for Housing Opportunity rezoning, approved in December 2024. City officials said at the time that it could add 80,000 homes over 15 years.

That ordinance made office-to-residential conversions easier. New York City has led the nation in these conversions for several years. Mamdani inherited a pipeline with about 12,000 units and continued championing it because it aligned with his affordability pitch.

“Hopefully this doesn’t have a pause effect, or people revisiting the City of Yes legislation, but I think that might be kind of a natural impact of this,” Michael Webb, a real estate attorney with New York City firm Farrell Fritz, told HousingWire TBD.

Lawsuit followed, but lost

The City of Yes legislation was passed by a narrow margin. Some City Council members opposed the law and called it a favor to developers.

A coalition of civic associations and elected officials from Staten Island, Queens, Brooklyn, and the Bronx sued the city over the City of Yes early last year. The suit did not challenge the policy’s housing goals. Instead, petitioners claimed the city violated state and local environmental review law in adopting it.

They argued the city unlawfully segmented City of Yes into three phases – carbon neutrality, economic opportunity and housing opportunity – to avoid assessing cumulative impacts. Petitioners also said the city failed to take a required “hard look” at harms such as sewer overflows, school overcrowding, and shadows, and never proposed any mitigation or alternatives. They lost the case in November.

Building bigger

The 235 East 42nd St. project was the marquee conversion example. Developer Metro Loft is converting two 1970s-era office towers built as Pfizer’s headquarters. One rises 10 stories, and the other stands 33 to 37 stories.

Metro Loft is adding 19 stories to the shorter building, bringing the total to 1,600 units. It is the largest office conversion in city history. The project demonstrated how vacant towers could be converted into badly needed apartments at scale by leveraging the state’s 2024 tax abatement for buildings with 25% affordable units.

That symbolism now carries added weight. A 2023 Moody’s Analytics study found only 3% of city office buildings were structurally suitable for conversion. That caveat drew little attention during the boom, but it now prompts sharper questions about whether incentives pushed marginal buildings – including one requiring a 19-story vertical addition atop a 1970s tower – into conversion too quickly.

The city comptroller’s office has flagged how these projects work financially, stacking tax exemptions against tight construction timelines. Critics argue that the dynamic can favor speed over caution. The concern echoes broader skepticism about big, complicated housing fixes, and this incident suggests even smaller-scale conversions carry underappreciated structural risk.

“With these office-to-residential conversions, it’s sort of like you’re building the plane while you’re flying it,” Webb said. “This really highlights the complexities when you’re doing a very ambitious office-to-residential conversion project.”

He noted that office buildings are typically built for heavier loads than residential. Aging structures can make that capacity uncertain in advance.

“If there’s a way that we can use this to make the process better, safer, let’s examine it,” Webb said. “I don’t want to see this becoming a problem that begs 1,000 solutions that aren’t needed.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Synergy One Lending, a division of American Pacific Mortgage (APM), will assume control of Newrez’s distributed retail mortgage business under a new strategic agreement announced Wednesday, extending an existing partnership and reshaping both lenders’ retail strategies.

The transition moves Newrez’s distributed retail operations and personnel to Synergy One, which is building out a purpose-built retail platform following its June merger with APM. Terms of the deal were not disclosed, according to the company announcement.

San Diego-based Synergy One said the deal will increase its national retail footprint, adding branches and originators at a time when many lenders are still rationalizing their physical networks after years of margin compression and interest rate volatility. Synergy One said it’s licensed in 49 states, employs 540 people and operates 65 branches nationwide.

Data from mortgage tech platform RETR shows that as of July 6, following the addition of Synergy One, APM now has 1,135 producing loan officers. Since the start of 2026, APM has produced about $5.1 billion in mortgages, ranking No. 29 among all U.S. lenders.

Newrez — a Rithm Capital subsidiary and top-five U.S. mortgage lender and servicer by volume — framed the move as a redeployment of capital and resources toward joint venture partnerships and its localized Newrez Direct strategy, retail segments it views as having the strongest long-term upside. Newrez will continue to originate through its wholesale, correspondent, consumer direct and joint venture channels.

“This transition is direct evidence of the momentum behind Synergy One right now,” Aaron Nemec, division president of Synergy One Lending, said in a statement. “We have worked hard to build a powerful platform for retail originators, and Newrez’s decision to trust us with their people reflects the strength of what we have built. We are proud to welcome this team and energized about what we will build from here.”

“This move reflects our confidence in Synergy One as a partner and a continued deliberate focus on the areas of our business where we see the strongest growth opportunity going forward,” Newrez President Baron Silverstein said.

RETR data shows that Newrez is the 25th-largest U.S. mortgage lender since the start of the year, having closed $5.4 billion in volume.

Follows the merger with APM

The transition comes roughly a month after Synergy One joined forces with fellow California-based lender American Pacific Mortgage. Under the merger agreement, Synergy One is maintaining its brand name under APM’s divisional dba model. APM is licensed in 49 states, employs more than 2,900 people and operates nearly 300 branches.

As higher-for-longer rates and elevated origination costs keep pressure on company margins, lenders are making careful choices about which channels they want to own. Newrez’s decision to exit distributed retail in favor of JVs and consumer direct efforts — and Synergy One’s move to double down on traditional retail — illustrate diverging but conscious bets on where future home purchase business and operating leverage will come from.

APM is 49% employee-owned through an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP). That could be a factor for incoming Newrez retail teams as they weigh long-term career paths, particularly as more originators look for stability, equity participation and local control in a volatile interest rate environment.

This article was written by Neil Pierson with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Ryan Smith will become CEO of Visionary Homes on Sept. 1, 2026, as founder and current chief executive Jeff Jackson transitions to chairman of the board, the Utah homebuilder recently announced.

Smith joined Visionary Homes on June 15 and will work alongside Jackson through the summer before formally assuming the chief executive role in September, according to the company’s announcement. Jackson, who co-founded Visionary Homes in 2004, will remain full-time through the end of 2026 to support the handover and then move into the chairman role on Jan. 1, 2027.

The company said the move is part of a multiyear leadership succession plan at one of Utah’s largest privately held homebuilders. Visionary Homes builds communities from Logan to St. George and operates in partnership with Misawa Homes America, the U.S. subsidiary of Japan’s Misawa Homes Co. Ltd.

Smith brings more than 20 years of experience in production homebuilding and master-planned communities across the Mountain West and Southwest. He joins Visionary from Oakwood Homes, a Clayton Homes company, where he served as president and chief operating officer of a four-market, $442 million homebuilder. The company said he grew sales and starts 41% in 2025 even as those markets declined.

Earlier in his career, Smith ran Oakwood’s Utah and Arizona division from Salt Lake City and held division leadership roles at Beazer Homes and Shea Homes. He holds an MBA from the University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business.

“I am honored to join Visionary Homes,” Smith said in the announcement. “Jeff and the Visionary team have created a special organization. You can feel Visionary’s commitment to quality in everything they do by simply being around the team.”

“From the first time I met Ryan, one thing was clear: he is a kind, driven leader people instinctively respect,” Jackson said. “He is the right person to lead Visionary forward, and he has my full confidence and support.”

Visionary Homes said it is scaling toward 2,000 annual home starts and expanding into neighboring markets. The company said its mission, values and commitments to trade partners, customers and communities will remain unchanged through the transition.

The leadership change comes as Utah remains one of the nation’s fastest-growing housing markets, with strong in-migration and persistent supply constraints. A CEO with a track record of growing volume in softening markets could influence how aggressively Visionary Homes pursues land, labor and materials across the state and into adjacent regions.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

In a request for information (RFI) scheduled for publication Thursday in the Federal Register, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) will seek public input on whether mortgage disclosure requirements and other lending regulations should be revised to reduce compliance burdens and improve access to mortgage credit.

The RFI, viewed by HousingWire in its unpublished version on the register, was filed by CFPB acting director Russell Vought.

The bureau said it’s considering potential regulatory changes consistent with President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14393, titled “Promoting Access to Mortgage Credit.” The order directs federal agencies to review regulations that may increase the cost of mortgage lending and limit access to credit.

The CFPB is requesting comments on three primary areas: integrated mortgage disclosures under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), together commonly known as TRID; the right of rescission for certain refinance transactions; and disclosure requirements for reverse mortgages.

The bureau is asking whether current rules create unnecessary burdens for lenders and borrowers while still providing adequate consumer protections. Areas under review include disclosure timing requirements, tolerance thresholds, electronic disclosures and whether smaller financial institutions should receive more tailored rules.

For reverse mortgages, the CFPB said current disclosure requirements rely on multiple documents, including Truth in Lending disclosures, Good Faith Estimates and HUD-1 settlement statements. The agency is seeking feedback on whether reverse mortgage borrowers would benefit from a single set of integrated disclosures designed specifically for the product.

The bureau is also reviewing the Total Annual Loan Cost, or TALC, a disclosure used in reverse mortgages. Specifically, the CFPB wants to know whether TALC calculations should be updated, and whether showing projected loan balance growth in dollar amounts would be easier for borrowers to understand than current annualized cost figures.

The CFPB is also seeking input on whether reverse mortgage borrowers would benefit from educational materials tailored specifically to the product rather than the general mortgage information currently required.

While the request for information does not propose any regulatory changes, the CFPB said comments will help determine whether future rulemaking is appropriate.

This article was written by Sarah Wolak and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Sotheby’s International Realty has acquired Majestic Realty Collective, a luxury real estate organization operating multiple Sotheby’s International Realty affiliates across the western U.S.

The acquisition expands Sotheby’s International Realty’s presence in luxury and resort markets, adding operations in Colorado, Utah, Nevada, California and other western regions.

Majestic Realty Collective includes LIV Sotheby’s International Realty, Summit Sotheby’s International Realty, Sierra Sotheby’s International Realty, Las Vegas Sotheby’s International Realty, Sun Valley Sotheby’s International Realty, Group One Sotheby’s International Realty, Desert Sotheby’s International Realty and Central Coast Sotheby’s International Realty.

The operations will join Sotheby’s International Realty’s existing company-owned locations in markets including New York City, Beverly Hills, San Francisco, Houston and Palm Beach.

Majestic Realty Collective will continue operating under its existing leadership team, including Scott Webber and Thomas Wright.

The transaction includes American Discovery Capital, Webber, founder and CEO of Majestic Realty II, and Wright, CEO and principal broker of Summit Sotheby’s International Realty and president and COO of Majestic Realty II.

“From the beginning, we built our organization around a simple belief: exceptional advisors deserve and benefit from a platform of personal and professional growth,” said Webber. “By aligning with Sotheby’s International Realty, Inc., we gain access to additional resources and enhanced technology while preserving the local expertise and culture that has defined our success. The Sotheby’s International Realty brand has been central to our growth, and this alignment creates even greater opportunities for our advisors while strengthening our ability to serve clients whose lives, businesses, and investments span multiple markets.”

Philip White, president and CEO of Sotheby’s International Realty, said the acquisition builds on an existing relationship between the organizations.

“The acquisition of Majestic Realty Collective represents a natural evolution of a long-standing relationship and shared commitment to excellence,” said Philip White, president and CEO of Sotheby’s International Realty. “Scott, Thomas, and their teams have built one of the most admired organizations in luxury real estate by combining entrepreneurial vision, exceptional local expertise, and an unwavering commitment to the Sotheby’s International Realty brand.”

Majestic Realty Collective includes a development division representing more than 40 new-construction and master-planned community projects. The organization has also focused on advisor recruitment, leadership development and operational support.

Sotheby’s International Realty said the acquisition will support additional investment in technology, marketing and advisor services, including access to Compass International Holdings’ proprietary Home Platform.

Financial terms of the transaction were not disclosed.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Douglas Elliman announced today a companywide technology transformation aimed at consolidating systems, automating operations and developing new real estate intelligence capabilities through a newly formed business unit called Elius.

The New York-based real estate firm said the initiative will operate across two tracks; modernizing brokerage operations and creating a separate intelligence platform designed to develop new data-driven products and services.

The transformation will be powered by Google Cloud technology, including its artificial intelligence (AI) models and enterprise infrastructure.

Through AI-enabled automation and technology consolidation, Douglas Elliman expects to reduce non-commission operating expenses over the next three years while improving operational efficiency.

The second part of the initiative centers on Elius, which Douglas Elliman said will use the company’s proprietary luxury real estate data to develop intelligence tools beyond traditional property search and portal models.

Leaders said Elius will draw from transaction activity, market data and information generated by its agents and clients while maintaining protections around confidential client information.

“The next era of this business will be defined by intelligence,” said Michael Liebowitz, president and CEO of Douglas Elliman. “For generations, residential real estate has been organized around the transaction — and for just as long, the data that real estate transactions generate has been monetized by nearly everyone except the brokerages that create it. We are changing that model and taking it back.”

Douglas Elliman said Elius is expected to support several areas of the company, including brokerage operations, development marketing and international business.

Potential applications include workflow automation, market insights, lead generation and client matching, the company aded.

Douglas Elliman said it plans to fund the initial technology rollout and Elius development using existing resources.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Unlock Partnership Solutions Inc., dba Unlock Technologies, has agreed to treat its home equity agreements (HEAs) as consumer credit under Colorado law, pay restitution to affected homeowners, and meet state licensing and disclosure rules, the Colorado attorney general’s office announced June 24.

The office of Attorney General Phil Weiser said it determined Unlock’s products are consumer credit transactions that must comply with the state’s Uniform Consumer Credit Code — including the Colorado Consumer Equity Protection Act (CEPA), rate caps, mandatory disclosures and licensing obligations.

Unlock markets arrangements in which homeowners receive a lump-sum cash payment in exchange for a percentage of their home’s future value, regardless of whether the home appreciates or depreciates. State regulators concluded that these HEA contracts function as loans subject to interest rate limits and other consumer protections — a position that other state and federal regulators are increasingly taking with similar shared-equity or home equity investment products.

Under the settlement, Unlock must:

  • Follow Colorado lending laws under the Uniform Consumer Credit Code, including CEPA
  • Comply with state rate caps
  • Provide all UCCC-required disclosures
  • Obtain required Colorado licenses before resuming operations in the state
  • Make restitution payments directly to affected consumers, including additional payments as more loans close

As of June 24, Unlock has identified $283,375 in restitution owed to 125 Colorado homeowners whose contracts exceeded state interest rate limits, according to an announcement by the AG’s office. That figure is expected to rise as additional loans close in the coming months and years.

“Colorado homeowners deserve transparency and fair dealing when they make decisions about their home equity,” Weiser said in a statement. “Today’s agreement ensures that homeowners receive the restitution they are owed and that Unlock will follow Colorado lending laws going forward.”

Unlock issued a statement to HousingWire‘s Reverse Mortgage Daily (RMD) to explain its reasoning for a negotiated resolution.

“We stand behind the integrity of Unlock’s Home Equity Agreement (HEA) and our compliance with all applicable state laws. With more than 20,000 homeowners funded across the U.S., an A+ BBB rating, and a 4.8-star Trustpilot rating, our track record reflects the trust homeowners place in us every day,” the statement read.

“We chose to resolve this matter with the Attorney General’s Office because a negotiated resolution, rather than prolonged litigation, is the right path forward for our business and for the Colorado homeowners who want options in how they access their equity. We want regulation for our industry and are actively advocating for it as a member of the Coalition for Home Equity Partnership (CHEP). We believe that purpose-built regulation — that matches how HEAs actually work — is the best long-term answer for both our industry and consumers, but establishing a framework under existing law is preferable to regulatory ambiguity.

“This resolution establishes a clear cost ceiling that we can operate under and keeps the HEA product available in Colorado. As we continue to clarify how existing requirements would apply to HEAs, we remain committed to working with policymakers so that Colorado homeowners have more ways to access the equity they’ve built in their homes.”

Growing scrutiny, changing guidelines

The action underscores growing state scrutiny of alternative home equity products that have been pitched as non-debt “investments” rather than loans. For mortgage lenders, servicers and real estate agents in Colorado, the settlement signals that shared-equity agreements may be treated as consumer credit, with full application of rate caps, disclosures and licensing rules.

Nonbank equity access providers operating in Colorado will need to assess whether their products trigger UCCC coverage and CEPA obligations, while ensuring they are licensed and structured as compliant loans rather than unregulated investment contracts. Lenders and brokers should also be prepared to explain these regulatory distinctions to homeowners when they compare products like home equity lines of credit (HELOCs), cash-out refinances and equity-sharing agreements.

Consumer and secondary market demand for home equity investment products remain high even as the arrangements are being investigated and reclassified.

In May, Unlock completed the largest securitization in the space this year — a $358.5 million deal backed by a pool of more than 3,500 HEAs. The company said at the time that the offering was oversubscribed and attracted interest from a number of institutional investors, including six first-time participants in Unlock’s securitization program.

Late last year, Unlock closed a $303 million HEA securitization with the help of Saluda Grade, which issued and sponsored the transaction. That came a few months after Unlock secured $250 million from D2 Asset Management through a purchase commitment agreement. D2 also invested $30 million in Unlock through a Series B seed round in late 2024.

Unlock CEO Jim Riccitelli told RMD earlier this year that shared equity products need “purpose-built regulation.” The segment remains small, but the three largest providers — Point Digital Finance, Hometap Equity Partners and Unlock — originated 54,000 agreements between 2015 and 2025, according to research from the Urban Institute.

“The core issue is a regulatory mismatch. What’s happening with shared-equity products is what happens in category formation of any new and fast-growing product category,” Riccitelli said.

“Existing rules and regulations weren’t designed for the structure of a shared-equity product, and what we’re seeing is exactly what new financial product category formation looks like: growth, scrutiny, regulatory efforts that are at times flawed and are at times good, and then clearer definition and workable solutions.”

Editor’s note: This story was updated with comments from Unlock.

This article was written by Neil Pierson and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Previously asking $20 million, this private Hudson Valley estate on 185 acres heads for auction this month, starting at or above $7.95 million. Located in Millbrook Hunt Country, the property, which offers mountain views in every direction, once served as the rural retreat of Andrew Carnegie’s daughter, Margaret Carnegie. In addition to that legacy, the estate’s top-tier equestrian facilities include a 10-stall barn with a tack room, staff housing, and paddocks enclosed with post-and-rail fencing, some with field shelters. The property also features miles of fenced pasture and private riding trails.

Several buildings, adding up to 13,700 square feet, sit on the property. In all, there are nine bedrooms and nine full baths. The main residence has been updated for modern living and entertaining.

The living room opens beneath 20-foot ceilings, anchored by a fireplace. French doors open to a terrace for outdoor living surrounded by mountain views.

The kitchen stands ready for dining and entertaining a crowd of any size with Viking and Bosch appliances, joined by a breakfast room and a large formal dining room. A paneled library has a working fireplace.

Upstairs, the private primary suite features a sitting room and dressing room in addition to a luxurious bathroom. Additional bedrooms offer timeless charm and modern comforts, including an elevator.

A carriage house contains three guest apartments and space for five vehicles. A winter greenhouse keeps the garden growing all year round.

In addition to the aforementioned equestrian amenities, serious equestrians can make use of a hunter trial course. There are two farm-manager apartments on the property in addition to groom accommodations and utility facilities.

There are numerous terraces and a gazebo for outdoor living close to home. The surrounding acreage provides the very essence of country life, with rolling meadows, woodlands, a private pond, and rolling lawns.

Millbrook is home to Millbrook Hunt, Mashomack Polo Club, Tamarack Preserve, and Sandanona hunt clubs, offering access to riding, polo, upland shooting, sporting clays, angling, hiking, golf, wineries, and outdoor recreation. The nearby village offers shopping and dining just minutes away, all just 90 minutes from Manhattan.

Previously asking $20 million, the prized property is offered for $7.95 million or above in an auction that begins Thursday, July 9, 2026, at 7 p.m.

Previews are by appointment, through July 8, 11 a.m.to 5 p.m. daily.

RELATED:

The post 185-acre equestrian estate that once belonged to the Carnegie family heads to auction first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

As more Americans end marriages later in life, some senior homeowners are turning to reverse mortgages as a way to manage the financial challenges of a “gray divorce.”

Divorces that arise when couples are in their 50s or older, commonly known as gray divorces, present unique financial challenges because they often occur after retirement, when income is largely fixed and assets are limited.

Rates of gray divorce in the U.S. doubled between 1990 and 2010, according to research published by the National Library of Medicine and cited by The New York Times.

Lisa Moriello, the national retail reverse sales manager at loanDepot and a Certified Divorce Lending Professional (CDLP), wrote in a think piece published on social media that the “stakes are higher” for divorce later in life.

“Older adults take a bigger financial and psychological hit from divorce than younger adults, and they have far less runway to recover,” Moriello wrote. “Retirement accounts, pensions and home equity that were built to support one household must suddenly support two.”

Moriello wrote that women often “absorb the largest setback” since they often have lower lifetime earnings and smaller retirement savings.

Unlike younger divorcing couples, older homeowners have less ability to replace lost income through new jobs or career changes. Many mistakenly believe they will keep both Social Security checks if a spouse dies, only to discover that is not the case and that their post-divorce income may be even tighter than expected.

“For a 35-year-old, a rough divorce settlement is a setback. For a 65-year-old, it can be the difference between a secure retirement and outliving their money,” Moriello wrote.

Housing is often the largest asset on the table, and decisions about the home can determine whether a newly single older adult can maintain financial stability.

In cases where one spouse wants to remain in the home, a reverse mortgage can “fund an equity buy-out while eliminating the required monthly principal-and-interest payment” if the homeowner is age 62 or older, Moriello wrote.

“Many of these homeowners are house-rich and cash-flow-constrained — exactly the profile where traditional financing options narrow just when they’re needed most,” she added.

In divorce settlements, the obligation to pay an ex-spouse can be treated as a “mandatory obligation,” allowing the spouse who stays in the home to tap a lump sum from a reverse mortgage to satisfy the settlement.

“A HECM for Purchase can help the departing spouse buy their next home without draining the settlement proceeds or taking on a payment they can’t sustain. These aren’t fringe strategies; they’re underutilized ones, largely because most divorce professionals — and frankly, most loan officers — were never trained to evaluate them,” she wrote.

Moriello noted that many divorce settlements negotiate the marital home based on assumptions rather than verified facts.

“The agreement says one spouse will refinance and buy out the other within 12 months — but nobody verified whether that spouse can qualify,” she wrote. “The decree awards the house to one party — but both names stay on the mortgage, and the departing spouse discovers years later that the contingent liability is blocking their own purchase. Support income is structured in a way that works for the family court but fails mortgage underwriting guidelines entirely.”

Moriello suggests that integrating mortgage planning into divorce negotiations earlier in the process could help reduce financing obstacles and improve long-term financial outcomes for both parties.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

New York City has launched a new interactive web tool that maps the city’s diverse linguistic landscape at the citywide, borough, and neighborhood levels. Released by the Department of City Planning, the NYC Language Explorer provides users with detailed tables, maps, and charts showing the languages spoken by New Yorkers with limited English proficiency, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau. The tool offers a way to better understand the city’s many languages and identify distinct language needs at the local level.

Credit: NYC DCP

Using the explorer, users can uncover insights into language use across NYC. For example, the tool shows that roughly 1.8 million residents have limited English proficiency, with the Bronx having the highest share of residents who speak a language other than English at 58 percent.

Additionally, Spanish is the most commonly spoken language among residents with limited English proficiency in every borough except Staten Island, where Chinese is the most prevalent.

Credit: NYC DCP

While the tool provides New Yorkers and language enthusiasts with a closer look at how language is used across the five boroughs, it is especially valuable for city agencies, nonprofits, researchers, advocates, and community organizations. Using the map, these groups can better tailor services and provide more accessible resources to residents.

“NYC is home to hundreds of languages, and that diversity is central to who we are,” DCP Director Sideya Sherman said. “NYC Language Explorer gives agencies, service providers, community organizations, and New Yorkers an accessible way to better understand the languages spoken in our neighborhoods.”

“By putting this data at people’s fingertips, we can help support more responsive planning, outreach and services across the five boroughs,” she added.

Credit: NYC DCP

The Language Explorer builds on DCP’s broader commitment to making demographic data more accessible, useful, and easier to understand, alongside tools such as Population FactFinder and Population MapViewer.

Its release also follows the recent publication of DCP’s Newest New Yorkers report, which offers a comprehensive analysis of the city’s foreign-born residents.

“NYC is a multilingual city, and NYC Language Explorer serves as another example of this administration’s commitment to language justice,” Commissioner Faiza N. Ali of the Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs said.

“The Language Explorer tool makes language data accessible and actionable, helping City agencies and community-based organizations to move beyond assumption-based decisions and towards evidence-based planning so that critical services and information can reach all New Yorkers,” she added.

RELATED:

The post New interactive tool maps the hundreds of languages spoken across NYC first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Fiserv‘s newly appointed president, Dhivya Suryadevara, has resigned less than a month after taking on the role, according to an 8-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 7.

According to the filing, Suryadevara resigned for “good reason” under the terms of her employment agreement and Fiserv‘s executive severance policy, a designation that may entitle her to severance benefits.

While her resignation as president took effect on Tuesday, Suryadevara will remain as a “non-executive officer employee” through July 31 to assist with the transition while continuing to receive her base salary and benefits.

The global fintech and payments company named Takis Georgakopoulos as CEO and Suryadevara as president on June 15 after former CEO Mike Lyons stepped down to lead Truist Financial Corp.

Also in the filing was the news that Andrew Gelb, executive vice president and chief operating officer for financial solutions, and Srini Krish, head of technology and operations for financial solutions, were appointed as interim leaders of Fiserv’s Financial Solutions business. The moves were effective July 7.

The news of Suryadevara’s resignation comes as The Wall Street Journal reported that several major banks — including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and PNC Financial Services — have held preliminary discussions about acquiring one of Fiserv’s debit payment networks.

Per WSJ’s reporting, owning a debit network could exempt a bank from the federal interchange fee caps imposed by the Durbin amendment, part of the Dodd-Frank Act, potentially allowing it to collect higher fees on debit transactions. Other banks have backed away from this type of deal before due to regulatory scrutiny concerns, the outlet noted.

Fiserv issued a statement to HousingWire about Suryadevara’s resignation while declining to comment about preliminary discussions of a potential acquisition.

“We can confirm that Dhivya Suryadevara has decided to leave Fiserv, and we thank her for her contributions. Andrew Gelb and Srini Krish, who have each been with the company for 12 years, are serving as interim co-heads of Financial Solutions, ensuring continuity and strong execution,” the statement read.

“The One Fiserv Action Plan and the strategy, priorities and key actions laid out at our Investor Day remain unchanged, and we continue to focus on delivering for clients through a client-first approach, innovation, and platform modernization.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

New York City is implementing emergency measures after an outbreak of Legionnaires’ Disease on the Upper East Side sickened at least 28 people as of Tuesday. Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Tuesday directed the city’s Department of Health to begin testing cooling towers across the affected area and mobilize more than 100 staff members for community outreach. In an unprecedented move, the administration will publicly release the addresses of buildings whose cooling towers test positive for the bacteria and order property owners to immediately drain, clean, and disinfect the systems to prevent further exposure.

“When there’s a public health threat, New Yorkers deserve urgency and transparency from their government,” Mamdani said. “That’s why we’re using every tool available to protect people by moving quickly to identify potential sources of exposure, requiring immediate remediation and making sure New Yorkers have the information they need to keep themselves and their families safe.”

Legionnaires’ Disease is a severe form of pneumonia caused by Legionella bacteria, which thrive in warm, stagnant water. Symptoms typically develop two to 14 days after exposure and may include fever, chills, muscle aches, and a cough. The disease can usually be treated effectively with antibiotics, especially when diagnosed early.

Each year, between 200 and 700 New Yorkers are diagnosed with the disease. An outbreak in central Harlem last summer infected more than 100 people and killed seven before the Department of Health concluded its investigation into the source of the outbreak, according to the New York Times.

The deadliest outbreak in city history occurred in 2015 in the South Bronx, sickening 120 people and killing 12. The outbreak persisted for more than a month as authorities struggled to identify its source, eventually linking it to a cooling tower atop the Opera House Hotel.

Rooftop cooling towers used in building air-conditioning and refrigeration systems can provide ideal conditions for the bacteria to grow.

During the summer, cooling towers can release water vapor containing Legionella bacteria that may travel thousands of feet before being inhaled, according to the Times. The Upper East Side has a high concentration of cooling towers, with roughly 160 registered across the three ZIP codes under investigation.

Two cases of the disease were identified on July 2 in Carnegie Hill and Yorkville, ZIP codes 10028 and 10128. While a community cluster is typically defined as three or more cases linked by location and time, the city began its response immediately rather than waiting for additional cases.

On July 5, ZIP code 10075 was added to the investigation after another confirmed case involving someone who lives or works in, or recently visited, the area. As of July 6, 23 people had been diagnosed with the disease, and 17 had been hospitalized, including two who have since been released and are recovering at home. No deaths have been reported.

By that day, the Health Department had collected samples from 139 cooling towers and said the remaining towers would be tested within the next 24 hours, if they were operating.

As of Tuesday, July 7, there have been 28 cases and 21 hospitalizations.

During previous outbreaks, the city required buildings with positive PCR results to increase chemical disinfectant levels while awaiting confirmation through culture testing, a process that can take up to two weeks. Full cleaning and disinfection were typically required only after a positive culture result.

This time, the city has adopted a more aggressive approach. Any building whose cooling tower tests positive during initial PCR screening will receive a Commissioner’s Order requiring full remediation, accelerating the response and reducing the risk of continued exposure.

Several property owners have already completed remediation, while others are actively carrying out the work.

Anyone who has been to the affected area since late June and develops symptoms consistent with Legionnaires’ disease should contact a healthcare provider immediately.

Residents in the affected ZIP codes can continue to drink tap water, bathe, shower, cook, and use their home air conditioners as usual.

RELATED:

The post NYC to release addresses of Upper East Side buildings linked to Legionnaires’ disease outbreak first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Former Federal Housing Administration Commissioner Frank Cassidy has rejoined Walker & Dunlop as a senior managing director after previously leading the FHA and serving as assistant secretary for housing at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The news comes just a month after Cassidy resigned from his post after taking a brief leave in April due to personal matters.

At Walker & Dunlop, Cassidy will advise clients on FHA and government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) financing strategies. He will work with owners, developers, lenders and investors as they navigate federal housing policy and capital markets, the commercial real estate finance company said.

Cassidy joined HUD in April 2025 and oversaw the agency’s housing programs as FHA commissioner and assistant secretary for housing. In that role, he managed the FHA’s approximately $2 trillion mortgage insurance portfolio covering single-family, multifamily and health care loans, supporting more than 8 million homeowners, about 1.5 million renters and nearly 4,000 health care facilities.

During his tenure, HUD reduced FHA multifamily mortgage insurance premiums to 25 basis points; eliminated the Green Mortgage Insurance Premium category and related reporting requirements; simplified multifamily mortgage insurance programs; and launched the Section 232 Express Lane initiative to expedite eligible financing applications for residential health care facilities.

Cassidy’s tenure also included the modernization of the FHA’s single-family loss-mitigation waterfall and HUD’s announcement that it would adopt the VantageScore 4.0 and FICO 10T credit-scoring models.

Cassidy also oversaw HUD’s Multifamily Assisted Housing Portfolio, which serves more than 1.2 million low-income residents, along with the agency’s housing counseling program and manufactured housing construction standards.

“Serving at HUD gave me the opportunity to help shape housing policy during an important period for our country’s history,” Cassidy said. “I’m excited to return to Walker & Dunlop and work alongside our talented team to deliver the financing solutions our clients need to increase housing supply, improve affordability, and connect public policy with private capital.”

Before joining HUD, Cassidy worked at Walker & Dunlop, where he helped expand the firm’s FHA lending platform for multifamily, affordable housing, senior housing and health care properties.

Walker & Dunlop executives said Cassidy’s experience at HUD will help clients navigate changes in federal housing policy and government-backed financing programs.

“Frank returns to Walker & Dunlop at a defining moment in the housing industry,” said Sheri Thompson, executive vice president and head of affordable housing at Walker & Dunlop. “Our country continues to face a significant housing shortage, and collaboration between the public and private sectors will be essential to delivering more affordable and workforce housing.

“Frank’s leadership at HUD and deep understanding of FHA programs will be critical in helping clients navigate the evolving finance landscape.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Mortgage applications decreased 2.2% from one week earlier, according to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA)’s weekly mortgage applications survey for the week ending July 3. This week’s results include an adjustment for the Fourth of July holiday.

On an unadjusted basis, the index decreased 12% compared with the previous week.

The adjusted refinance index decreased 4% from the previous week and was 8% higher unadjusted than the same week one year ago. The seasonally adjusted purchase index decreased 1% from last week. The unadjusted purchase index decreased 11% compared with the previous week and was 5% higher than the same week one year ago.

“Mortgage application volume was little changed during the week of the nation’s 250th Independence Day celebration, as the 30-year fixed rate increased slightly to 6.58%,” Mike Fratantoni, MBA’s senior vice president and chief economist, said in a statement.

“After adjusting for the Independence Day holiday, government purchase volume increased modestly, led by a 5% gain in VA purchase applications, while conventional purchase activity declined. Refinance application volume was down 4%, as homeowners saw little enticement to act with rates still elevated.”

The refinance share of mortgage activity decreased to 40.6% of total applications, down from 41.4% the previous week. The adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) share of activity increased to 7.8% of total applications.

By product, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) share of total applications decreased to 16.4%, down from 16.9% a week earlier. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) share increased to 13%, up from 12.9%, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) share increased to 0.5%, up from 0.4%.

The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages with conforming loan balances ($832,750 or less) increased to 6.58%, up from 6.57%, while the average rate for 30-year fixed mortgages with jumbo loan balances decreased to 6.50%, down from 6.52%.

The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed loans backed by the FHA increased to 6.28%, up from 6.27%, while the rate for 15-year fixed mortgages decreased to 5.99%, down from 6.00%. The average rate for 5/1 ARMs increased to 5.84%, up from 5.79%.

Xactus Mortgage Intent Index

Xactus’s Mortgage Intent Index — which analyzes aggregated, anonymized credit-pull activity across the Xactus Intelligent Verification Platform — declined to a reading of 110.9 for the week of July 3.

chart visualization

“The Xactus Mortgage Intent Index declined about 10% week-over-week due to the Fourth of July holiday,” said Thomas Lloyd, Xactus’ chief strategy officer. “Even so, the unadjusted index surpassed the same week in 2025 by roughly 1.56% — a positive sign after two weeks of year-over-year declines.

“With a slight dip in mortgage interest rates, the index turned positive year-over-year, underscoring the pent-up demand and potential tailwinds if rates decline further,” he added.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The city’s Department of Buildings on Tuesday said a high-rise tower under construction in Midtown is now stable after structural columns buckled. The building, Pfizer’s former headquarters on 42nd Street, which is currently being converted into a new residential development, was found to be structurally compromised, prompting the city to evacuate several buildings in the area and close surrounding streets. DOB Commissioner Ahmed Tigani on Tuesday night said crews were able to enter and stabilize the impacted floors as part of an emergency intervention. Evacuation orders were lifted for some buildings, and the police reopened some streets, although 42nd Street between 2nd and 3rd Avenues remains closed to vehicles. Work to stabilize the building will continue this week.

Photo credit: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office

As part of an emergency intervention that began last night, crews brought in metal beams and poles, as well as galvanized steel, to replace the buckled columns. After the building is stabilized, plans for a long-term solution will need to be established.

“I can say right now that the building is stable,” Tigani said on Tuesday night. “It has not moved since we started monitoring it earlier today. We feel confident in the emergency plan that we have now to make it stable.”

The buildings still under an emergency evacuation order include: 15 2nd Avenue, 235 East 43rd Street, 231 East 43rd Street, 225 East 43rd Street, and a partial evacuation of 217 East 43rd Street.

Tigani would not speculate on the cause of the structural failure and said the city will continue to investigate. The commissioner added that the city will look at the approved plans for the conversion project to understand the situation.

Photo courtesy of FDNY on X

Just before 8 a.m. on Tuesday, fire officials received a 911 call about falling bricks near East 42nd Street. Department of Buildings officials found that wasn’t the case, but did confirm that two structural columns on the 21st floor of 235 East 42nd Street had buckled. Officials deemed the structure unstable and evacuated the building and surrounding areas, and established a collapse zone.

Fire Department officials said steel beams on the 21st floor of the 37-story building on 42nd Street started to “bend and deflect,” and multiple cracks and sagging floors were discovered. The police closed 40th to 45th Streets between 1st and 3rd Avenues to pedestrian and vehicular traffic as first responders and engineers work to shore up the building.

During a press conference at the scene, Mayor Zohran Mamdani said there have been no injuries, and all construction workers at the site have been accounted for.

“This is an extremely serious situation, and I am thankful to our first responders for quickly arriving at the site and to New Yorkers for reacting calmly and with urgency,” Mamdani said. He urged New Yorkers to avoid the area.

FDNY Chief John Esposito said the building had continued to move since the first responders arrived on the scene. Since it’s a steel-frame building, it “would not be a total collapse,” Esposito said. “It would be more of a localized collapse,” he added.

As of 4 p.m., NYC Deputy Mayor for Housing and Planning Leila Bozorg told NY1 that the building is no longer moving, allowing for a team of six people to enter the building to assess the damage.

Rendering courtesy of Streetsense.

Metro Loft Developers and David Werner Real Estate are currently converting the former Pfizer headquarters building, which sits between Grand Central Terminal and the United Nations, into more than 1,600 apartments, set to be the largest office-to-residential conversion in the country.

Designed by Gensler, the project added 19 stories atop the original 10-story building at 219 East 42nd Street and four stories to the taller tower at 235 East 42nd Street. About 100,000 square feet of amenities are planned. Leasing was scheduled to start this summer.

Nathan Berman of MetroLoft told The Real Deal that reports of a possible collapse have been “blown a little bit out of proportion,” and the issues are “fixable.”

Berman also told the website that claims from a Steamfitters Local 638 worker that the building had not used enough steel to support the additional weight were “total nonsense.”

“This was well designed and approved by structural engineers,” Berman said. “This is a freak accident that something occurred with these two specific columns that either were not reinforced or were not reinforced sufficiently, and they gave way. That’s it. There’s no mystery, and there’s no magic.”

Editor’s note: The original version of this story was published on July 7, 2026, and has since been updated. This story will continue to be updated as the situation develops.

RELATED:

The post Pfizer’s former headquarters in Midtown is stable after buckled columns led to evacuations first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Reggora has received verification from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for its Reggora Forms software under the Uniform Appraisal Dataset (UAD) 3.6 specification.

The platform can now be used during the government-sponsored enterprises’ Broad Production Period ahead of a looming compliance deadline.

Beginning Nov. 2, appraisal reports submitted to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac must comply with the UAD 3.6 standard, replacing legacy appraisal forms with the new Uniform Residential Appraisal Report built on MISMO v3.6 standards.

Reggora said its browser-based platform will support both the new UAD 3.6 format and the existing UAD 2.6 forms, including General Purpose reports, allowing appraisers to complete both appraisal types from the same application.

“Appraisers have been forced to juggle three to five applications to complete a single report: a form filler, a data tool, MLS platforms, and standalone analytics. Every switch costs them time, context, accuracy and money,” said Brian Zitin, CEO of Reggora. “Now an appraiser will be able to do everything they need in one place, including searching MLS and public records, at no cost.

According to the company, the platform includes integrated access to MLS data, public records, comparable property research, market condition analytics, cost approach calculations and automated time adjustments based on Federal Housing Finance Agency home price index data.

It also provides side-by-side support for both UAD 2.6 and UAD 3.6 appraisal reports.

The Broad Production Period for UAD 3.6 began Jan. 26, giving lenders and appraisers time to transition before the mandatory implementation date later this year.

“A clean break on November 2 is not a real transition plan,” said Harrison Kennedy, product manager for Reggora Forms. “Appraisers need months of reps in the new workflow before it becomes a habit, and they should not have to pay for a second piece of software to get them. The result is a platform that does not just check the compliance box. It makes appraisers genuinely faster.”

Reggora Forms is available immediately to residential appraisers at no cost and operates entirely through a web browser without software installation or per-report licensing fees.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Brands by Integra has expanded its presence in Georgia through the addition of Century 21 Crowe Realty, a brokerage based in Locust Grove.

As part of the transition, the brokerage will operate under the Century 21 Integra name. Clint Crowe will remain broker of record and continue overseeing the office during the integration.

Crowe founded Crowe Realty in 2009 before affiliating with the Century 21 brand in 2020. The brokerage has grown to nearly 100 agents serving the greater Atlanta and middle Georgia markets.

“We are excited to welcome Clint Crowe and his outstanding team to the Integra family,” said Rob D’Amico, president of operations for Brands by Integra. “Century 21 Crowe Realty has built an exceptional reputation by putting clients first and investing in its agents. By joining Century 21 Integra, their agents will gain access to enhanced technology, marketing, operational support and collaborative opportunities while continuing to deliver the trusted, local service their communities have come to expect. We look forward to supporting their continued success for years to come.”

Crowe is a second-generation real estate professional and former law enforcement officer. According to the company, he has focused on agent development and residential real estate throughout his career.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The residential real estate market today is fundamentally different than just a few years ago. In April, 5.8% of homes were taken off the market, reaching delisting rates not seen since March 2020. Plus, economic uncertainty and rising inflation have made generating sufficient income a challenge for many agents.

Despite this, many brokers operate as if transaction volume will return to normal. That’s a risk. If the last decade has taught us anything, it’s that you can’t predict where the market will go.

To set your business up for long-term success, brokers need the recurring revenue streams that property management delivers. Property management was once so labor-intensive that it risked distracting brokers from their primary business. But today, property management has been streamlined by AI and automation. It’s more scalable than ever.

The revenue problem: Transactional businesses need stability

Existing home sales have fallen to roughly 4.1 million annually, well below historic norms. These aren’t the conditions that many brokers built their cost structures around, and the slow market means many are struggling to turn a profit.

As earnings have declined, fewer agents are working in real estate full-time. Only 71% of agents list real estate as their only profession, a record low number since the National Association of Realtors began tracking the data in 2005.

If they want to retain productive agents and create additional revenue streams that make their business more resilient to the ebbs and flows of the market, brokers need to offer new opportunities.

Enter property management. Unlike intermittent real estate sales, property management generates regular monthly revenue. This means stability and certainty during slow sales cycles. And beyond that, recurring payments can also be a source of fuel for your company’s growth.

What many brokers still get wrong about property management

Historically, property management earned a reputation for operational headaches because it required time-consuming and difficult-to-scale activities:

  • Managing inquiries around the clock
  • Coordinating showings
  • Processing applications
  • Screening prospective renters
  • Managing owner communication

In the past, that reputation for being labor-intensive was largely earned. But today, in part due to cloud-based software and increasingly to AI, it’s a different story. Those workflows that made property management difficult to scale are increasingly automated. It’s time for perception to catch up with this technological reality.

How AI and automation have made property management more scalable

Today, AI and automation tools remove much of the repetitive, manual work of property management. 

AI virtual agents respond instantly to prospective renters at all hours, day and night, answering questions and even qualifying leads before moving them through the leasing funnel. Self-scheduling tools let prospects schedule a tour without your agents lifting a finger. And the boom in self-guided showings means you don’t even need a real estate agent present during the tour.

And that other big headache: The midnight mechanical failure. Well, maintenance request routing and tracking are now easily automated.

The result? Small teams can manage significantly larger portfolios than before. Here’s a perfect example: We work with a two-person property management team that doubled the size of their portfolio from 80 to 160 units, all because of the technology they use.

And the best part is, the right AI and automation tools even help convert more leads because the data shows prospective renters like the flexibility these tools deliver.

In fact, our customers see 61% of conversations with our virtual AI agent happening outside of business hours, but that technology means you don’t have to deal with phone calls or emails that interrupt dinnertime or weekends. And in addition to giving you your time back, faster responses mean happier customers for you, as their properties have fewer days on market. 

The accidental landlord opportunity is already sitting in most CRMs

Of course, before you even get to property management, you’ll first need to find property owners to work with. You might not have to look too far.

More and more homeowners are opting to rent out their properties rather than sell for less than their asking price. Accidental landlords are on the rise nationally.

But brokers don’t need to sit idly by while properties stay off the market. Single-family rental inventory is increasing, and the owners of these homes are being thrust into property management, many for the first time. They’re likely looking for help — that’s your opportunity.

In fact, you probably already have relationships with some accidental landlords. Check your CRM for clients with expired or withdrawn listings and former sellers who delayed moving.

When a homeowner becomes an accidental landlord, they often need guidance on how to price the rental, market the property, screen tenants and follow compliance requirements. Brokers are uniquely positioned to provide these services because you already have the local market and industry expertise.

The best time to diversify: Right now

Some brokers have already broadened their service mix, expanding into mortgage, title and other related services. But when your goal is to create more resilient, recurring revenue, property management is a natural fit.

Not only does property management leverage your existing market knowledge, but it’s also an opportunity to strengthen relationships with clients who are thinking about renting instead of selling. And when they do eventually sell, you’re ready to help with that, too. You’ll remain part of a homeowner’s journey for years rather than weeks.

Now, AI and automation have made property management easier to scale by eliminating much of the tedious administrative work and repetitive tasks that have historically bogged down property managers’ time.

For brokers willing to embrace modern technology, property management is one of the most practical and scalable growth opportunities in residential real estate.

Vanessa Anderson is the CEO of ShowMojo and Tenant Turner, leasing platforms for single-family and multi-family rentals. 
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes embedded across the mortgage lifecycle, lenders are rethinking how they use data to drive decisions and automate workflows. Chris McEntee, Vice President of Corporate and Product Development at ICE, discusses how AI mortgage lending is transforming mortgage business intelligence, why data governance is becoming more important than ever and what organizations need to build AI-ready mortgage operations that can scale with confidence.

HousingWire: What are your thoughts on how lenders should approach business intelligence in their organization?

Chris McEntee: Business intelligence is undergoing a major transformation because of AI. Historically, it focused on collecting data, cleaning it and presenting it through reporting tools and dashboards that helped leaders make decisions. Those visualization tools remain important, but AI is changing what happens next.

I’d like my automated tools, if they’re driven by AI, to notify me as soon as that emerges, and that’s going to require a very direct connection to business intelligence and business data.

HW: How is ICE working with its clients to support the various ways data is needed?

CM: Lending is incredibly diverse, so how organizations consume data depends on their business model, product strategy and customer channels. Some lenders use data to automate marketing campaigns or respond to refinance opportunities in real time. Others combine their own enterprise data with ICE’s proprietary market data and third-party sources to improve decision-making.

The sophistication varies widely. Some organizations have enterprise data science teams managing complex real-time environments, while others simply want better visibility into their pipeline or marketing performance.

Regardless of size, the priority is accurate data and strong data governance. Organizations need a clear source of truth and confidence that third-party data won’t create conflicts, especially when automated processes depend on it. Many clients come to us collaboratively, asking how others have approached similar implementations. We want to help them build the best solution for their business.

HW: Why is data governance so important to AI growth and development, as well as measuring business performance more broadly?

CM: People sometimes think governance puts a wet blanket on innovation. It’s actually the opposite. Governance establishes clear rules around how data is stored, managed and used while bringing together stakeholders across cybersecurity, infrastructure, engineering and product development. It helps organizations move responsibly from proof of concept to production.

As AI tools become more sophisticated, accuracy becomes critical. A false signal, inaccurate data or compliance issue can quickly create larger problems. “If I get the first task wrong, the following five tasks are going to be off.”

That’s why organizations focus heavily on testing, quality control and validating outputs before automation scales. Good governance starts with entitlements, controls and understanding how data flows through every process. Clean data creates reliable automation. Dirty data simply cascades through every downstream task.

HW: With so many companies offering business intelligence and data solutions, what differentiates ICE as a leader in this space?

CM: We begin with two major systems of record: our servicing and origination platforms. That gives lenders a trusted source of truth for managing enterprise data and producing meaningful reports. Beyond that, we can inject data directly into workflows. Whether it’s enterprise data, ICE market data or third-party information like rates, fees or fraud data, we help lenders bring it together where decisions are being made.

One of our biggest advantages is flexibility. Customers can use their own proprietary data, integrate third-party providers or combine multiple sources. We don’t believe data has to come from a single place.

Ultimately, our differentiation comes from flexibility, scalability and the breadth of data we can deliver into mortgage workflows, helping lenders make faster, more informed decisions and support AI-ready mortgage operations.

Click Here

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Loan originator pipeline growth has followed a familiar formula: originate a purchase loan, capture a refinance when rates fall and hope the borrower returns for their next home purchase.

But in today’s housing market, that model is producing fewer opportunities. Purchase volume remains constrained, refinance activity is limited and lenders are searching for new ways to generate sustainable revenue. The next phase of growth may not come from finding new borrowers. It may come from serving existing ones differently.

Millions of homeowners have substantial home equity in retirement and are entering a new stage of financial planning. Rather than looking for lower interest rates or a larger home, they’re seeking ways to unlock cash and incorporate home equity into their long-term financial plans. Yet many loan originators lose touch with borrowers long before those conversations begin.

At Finance of America, this represents one of the most overlooked opportunities in today’s mortgage market. Through its lifecycle lending approach, the company helps forward originators expand beyond traditional purchase and refinance business so they can continue serving homeowners as their financial needs evolve. By incorporating reverse mortgage solutions into their practice, originators can extend relationships well beyond the initial transaction while creating new sources of growth.

Borrower needs don’t stop at retirement

The average lead model is built around the beginning of homeownership. But for millions of homeowners, the most significant financial decisions occur decades after that initial transaction.

As retirement approaches, priorities begin to shift. Protecting monthly budgets becomes more important than building home equity. Homeowners begin exploring ways to fund healthcare expenses, supplement retirement income, preserve investment portfolios or create greater financial flexibility using the home equity they’ve built. However, many loan originators aren’t part of those conversations.

“Many originators are fishing in only half the lake,” Kris Buglino, Wholesale Account Executive Manager at Finance of America, says. “They’re focused on purchase and refinance business while overlooking a growing segment of homeowners whose financial needs have evolved. The lenders finding growth today aren’t fishing harder. They’re simply fishing more of the lake.”

Rather than replacing forward lending, reverse lending expands it by allowing lenders to serve borrowers throughout the entire homeowner lifecycle.

The hidden opportunity inside every database

When business slows, originators immediately look for new lead sources. However, the better opportunity often already exists inside their customer relationship management (CRM) systems.

Loan originators have spent years building databases filled with past clients. Those borrowers are now aging, accumulating home equity and entering retirement with different financial goals than they had when they originally obtained their mortgages.

Instead of constantly acquiring new leads, lenders can identify existing customers who may benefit from conversations about strategically using their home equity. To help originators uncover those opportunities, Finance of America developed ReverseMatch, a proprietary eligibility engine that analyzes existing customer databases and identifies homeowners who may benefit from a reverse mortgage conversation based on factors such as age, available home equity and property location.

Rather than asking lenders to rebuild their marketing strategy, the goal is to provide greater visibility into opportunities they already possess. The philosophy is straightforward: Growth does not require more leads; it requires a better understanding of the borrowers already in the pipeline and the right solutions to match their needs.

Becoming a trusted expert instead of a transaction

For many originators, the greatest value of reverse lending extends beyond production volume. It changes the nature of client relationships. Rather than participating in a single mortgage transaction, loan originators become part of broader financial discussions involving retirement income and long-term financial security.

Those conversations naturally create opportunities to collaborate with financial advisors, wealth managers, CPAs, elder law attorneys and insurance professionals who increasingly recognize home equity as an important component of retirement planning.

Instead of competing for isolated mortgage transactions, originators become part of a coordinated team helping homeowners make more informed financial decisions.

Over the past decade, Finance of America-approved partner Karl Kuhn has steadily incorporated reverse mortgage lending into his practice, expanding beyond traditional purchase and refinance business while building long-term relationships with financial professionals and retirement advisors.

“We’re finally being invited to the table with financial advisors, wealth managers, CPAs, insurance professionals and elder law attorneys,” Karl Kuhn, VP, Reverse Mortgage Manager at American Portfolio Mortgage Corporation dba Town Square Mortgage, says. “They’re all looking for funding solutions, and home equity has become part of that conversation.”

That collaborative approach also creates stronger relationships. Helping one homeowner often introduces the loan originator to family members, financial professionals and future generations of borrowers.

“Instead of losing those opportunities, we’ve been able to continue serving borrowers while creating an additional source of production,” Kuhn says.

Those conversations also create opportunities to build relationships with borrowers’ adult children, many of whom are navigating their own homeownership journeys. By helping families through retirement conversations today, originators often become trusted mortgage resources for the next generation tomorrow.

As one relationship expands into multiple trusted connections, the value extends well beyond the original loan. In an environment where differentiation has become increasingly difficult, advisory relationships can become a meaningful competitive advantage.

Lowering the barrier to entry

Despite growing interest, many forward originators remain hesitant to enter the reverse mortgage space. The hesitation rarely stems from a lack of opportunity. Instead, many worry about product complexity, longer sales cycles and the learning curve required to become proficient.

Finance of America’s wholesale reverse mortgage team was built specifically to help forward originators confidently integrate reverse lending into their existing business. Rather than simply offering products, the company acts as an extension of each partner’s team through dedicated training, borrower education resources, educational marketing support, scenario guidance and operational expertise throughout the lending process.

“They’re an extension of my team,” Kuhn says. “The product knowledge, training and communication allow me to focus on my clients while knowing I have experts supporting me throughout the process.”

The objective isn’t to replace an originator’s existing business model. It’s designed to help lenders confidently expand it, allowing them to recognize new opportunities without feeling responsible for mastering every nuance of reverse mortgage lending on day one.

Lenders are preparing for the next phase of the market

The mortgage market will continue to evolve, but one trend is already clear: America’s homeowner population is aging while home equity continues to grow. Those demographic shifts are creating greater demand for conversations around retirement planning, liquidity and long-term financial flexibility.

For originators, the opportunity extends beyond adding another loan product. It represents an opportunity to build longer-term relationships, strengthen networks and remain relevant throughout every stage of a homeowner’s financial journey.

“The lenders winning today aren’t abandoning their primary market,” Buglino says. “They’re simply recognizing that the lake is bigger than they thought.”

For Finance of America, that’s what lifecycle lending is all about. Helping homeowners build home equity and helping them strategically use it aren’t separate businesses — they’re part of a more complete lending strategy. For forward originators, recognizing that opportunity requires more than a new product; it requires a new way of thinking about the homeowner journey.

Click Here

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Artificial intelligence (AI) is quickly becoming part of every conversation in homebuilding. But as builders invest in AI to improve sales, marketing and operations, many are overlooking the factor that will determine whether those investments succeed: organizational knowledge. AI is only as valuable as the information it can access.

Most builders already generate vast amounts of buyer data through websites, CRM systems, marketing platforms and daily customer interactions. The challenge isn’t collecting more information. It’s connecting that information into a single source of organizational knowledge that can inform every customer interaction and every business decision.

With the help of New Home Star, builders that successfully centralize buyer conversations, preserve institutional knowledge and connect data across the sales journey will be best positioned to unlock AI’s full potential. From improving speed-to-lead and personalizing buyer experiences to identifying market trends and reducing administrative work, AI for builders becomes significantly more valuable when it understands how a builder’s business actually operates.

The best AI strategy starts with a business problem, not the technology

The excitement surrounding AI for builders has led many organizations to search for places to apply the technology before clearly identifying the business problem they are trying to solve. That approach often leads to disappointing results.

Instead, builders should start with an end goal and ask where AI can create measurable business value. Can it accelerate repetitive tasks, improve decision-making, deliver better customer experiences or reduce manual work for sales teams?

One of the clearest examples is speed-to-lead. Every buyer inquiry should receive an immediate response followed by consistent outreach that becomes increasingly personalized as more information is gathered. Because the process is repetitive and measurable, it represents an ideal opportunity for AI to improve execution while allowing sales professionals to spend more time building relationships.

But identifying the right use case is only half the equation. The effectiveness of AI depends entirely on the quality and accessibility of an organization’s institutional knowledge, as well as the level of training the AI has to execute those tasks. Without that foundation, even the most sophisticated technology produces limited results.

The most valuable builder data isn’t where homebuilders think it is

Many organizations believe they simply need more data. In reality, most builders already collect an enormous amount of information. Marketing platforms track website activity, advertising engagement and email performance. CRM systems capture contacts and pipeline stages. Analytics platforms measure digital behavior.

The larger problem is that these systems rarely tell the complete story. The richest buyer intelligence begins when a prospective customer interacts with the sales team. Conversations reveal motivations, timelines, objections, competing communities and the specific features buyers value most. Yet much of that information remains trapped inside conversations, personal notebooks or employee memory.

Capturing those interactions automatically creates an entirely different level of organizational intelligence. Phone calls can be logged and transcribed. Emails and text messages can be connected to customer records. Buyer meetings can generate searchable summaries. Rather than asking salespeople to document every interaction manually, builders can make knowledge capture part of the normal workflow.

Why institutional knowledge is emerging as an asset for modern builders

Disconnected information creates challenges throughout an organization. Homebuilder marketing teams understand campaign performance but not necessarily why qualified buyers choose one community over another. Sales managers see individual conversations but struggle to identify recurring objections across multiple markets. Executives rely on dashboards that often lack the context behind customer behavior. Perhaps most importantly, when experienced employees leave, valuable customer knowledge often leaves with them.

New Home Star believes builders should think beyond simply storing information inside a builder CRM. The opportunity is to create an intelligence layer that connects conversations, CRM activity, website behavior, marketing engagement and customer communications into a single knowledge ecosystem.

Once information is centralized, organizations can begin answering more strategic questions:

  • Why are buyers deciding not to move forward?
  • Which objections are appearing across multiple communities?
  • What percentage of buyers are relocating?
  • Which competitors are buyers also considering?
  • What questions are buyers repeatedly asking?
  • Which messages are creating appointments rather than just leads?

Rather than creating endless dropdown fields or manual reports, homebuilder AI can interpret unstructured conversations and surface patterns that would otherwise remain hidden.

Why connected knowledge improves every customer interaction

The benefits of connected organizational knowledge extend far beyond reporting. Sales teams gain complete visibility into every customer interaction, allowing them to deliver faster, more personalized communication while reducing manual administrative work.

Homebuilder marketing teams move beyond broad campaigns toward messaging based on actual buyer motivations. Instead of assuming what matters to customers, they can understand recurring patterns about affordability, relocation, interest rates or competitive communities directly from customer conversations.

For buyers, the biggest improvement is continuity. Customers should never feel like they have to repeat the same information every time they interact with someone new. Every conversation should build upon the last, creating a seamless experience throughout the homebuying journey.

AI doesn’t replace personal relationships. Instead, it helps the organization remember everything the customer has already shared so employees can focus on delivering the human experiences that truly influence purchasing decisions.

AI success starts long before the first prompt

Success with AI requires more than just adopting new technology; it demands the operational discipline to sustain it. Organizations must recognize that even the most advanced tools cannot fix fundamentally flawed processes. 

That begins with structuring the builder CRM strategy around the builder’s actual sales process, establishing clear lifecycle stages, ownership rules and reporting standards. Equally important is consistent adoption. Calls, emails, appointments, notes and customer activities need to be captured reliably before AI can generate meaningful insights.

The final step is ensuring those systems create value for the people using them. Rather than functioning solely as management oversight, the builder CRM data should help sales professionals understand who to contact next, what has already occurred and which activities can be automated. AI is most valuable when it reduces repetitive work rather than creating additional administrative tasks.

The next competitive advantage

As AI capabilities continue to evolve, technology itself will become increasingly accessible. The differentiator won’t be which builders use AI, but which builders have spent years building the organizational knowledge that allows AI to generate meaningful business value. The organizations investing in connected knowledge today are preparing not just for today’s tools, but for every generation of AI that follows.

Those organizations will be better at personalizing customer experiences, identifying market trends sooner, onboarding employees faster and making better decisions because their AI understands their unique business rather than relying on generic industry information.

For builders preparing for the next wave of AI, the priorities are clear: strengthen the CRM, connect communication channels, automatically capture customer interactions and organize institutional knowledge into a unified, accessible system. Only then can builders establish effective, functional workflows with this foundational data.

The builders making those investments today won’t just have better AI. They’ll have AI that understands their customers, their markets and the expertise their organization has built over time, creating an advantage that becomes more valuable with every advancement in AI.

Click Here

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Mortgage rates edged slightly lower Tuesday, offering a modest break for homebuyers during the busiest stretch of the summer housing season. While the move may save borrowers a little money, economists say the broader outlook suggests mortgage rates are likely to remain elevated well into the future.

According to Zillow, the average interest rate on a 30-year fixed-rate purchase mortgage stood at 6.635% on July 7, down from 6.664% the previous day. The average 30-year refinance rate measured 6.728%, while the 15-year fixed mortgage averaged 5.722%.

Although the decline was small, it follows several weeks of rising borrowing costs that have kept affordability under pressure for prospective buyers.

The recent increase in mortgage rates has been driven less by changes in the Federal Reserve’s benchmark interest rate than by investors’ expectations about where monetary policy is headed.

At its June meeting, the Federal Reserve left its benchmark federal funds rate unchanged at 3.50% to 3.75%, but policymakers adopted a more hawkish tone. Updated economic projections showed the median expectation for the federal funds rate rising to 3.8% by the end of 2026, signaling that at least one additional rate increase remains possible if inflation does not continue to moderate.

That marks a significant shift from much of the past two years, when financial markets were focused almost entirely on the timing of future rate cuts.

Inflation remains the central obstacle.

The latest Consumer Price Index showed consumer prices rising 4.2% over the previous 12 months, reinforcing the Federal Reserve’s concern that inflation has not yet returned to its long-term target.

Helping offset some of that pressure was last week’s softer-than-expected employment report.

The U.S. economy added only 57,000 jobs in June, well below economists’ expectations, while payroll figures for April and May were revised lower. Slower hiring generally pushes Treasury yields lower, and because mortgage rates closely track the yield on the 10-year U.S. Treasury, weaker employment data provided modest downward pressure on borrowing costs.

Housing economists caution that buyers should not expect rates to fall dramatically anytime soon.

Selma Hepp, chief economist at Cotality, said mortgage rates are unlikely to decline meaningfully until inflation slows further and long-term Treasury yields retreat. Likewise, Robert Dietz, chief economist for the National Association of Home Builders, has said mortgage rates below 6% may not become common again until 2027.

For families shopping for a home, even small differences matter.

On a $400,000 mortgage, the difference between borrowing at 6% and 6.6% can increase monthly payments by well over $150, adding tens of thousands of dollars over the life of a 30-year loan. That affordability gap continues to sideline many first-time buyers despite a gradual increase in homes available for sale.

Regional housing markets are also beginning to diverge.

According to the latest S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller Home Price Index, several markets that experienced rapid pandemic-era appreciation—including Tampa, Phoenix, Dallas, and Miami—have begun recording year-over-year price declines. Meanwhile, more established markets in the Northeast and Midwest, including New York, Chicago, and Boston, continue posting price gains supported by stronger local employment and more limited housing inventory.

Builders say the country’s housing shortage remains the larger structural challenge.

Industry estimates suggest the United States is still short roughly 1.2 million housing units, meaning affordability problems are unlikely to disappear simply because mortgage rates eventually decline.

For now, Tuesday’s move offers only modest relief.

Prospective buyers hoping for a return to the historically low mortgage rates of recent years will likely need to remain patient. Until inflation moves decisively lower and the Federal Reserve becomes more comfortable easing monetary policy, borrowing costs are expected to remain well above the levels that fueled the housing boom earlier this decade.

JBizNews Desk | Washington, D.C.

© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or distribution without written permission is prohibited.

On:

Hundreds Evacuated as Buckling Columns Trigger Massive Midtown ‘Frozen Zone’ at Mamdani’s Signature Housing Project

Construction workers converting the former Pfizer headquarters into apartments called 911 at roughly 8 a.m. on Tuesday, July 7, after they watched steel support columns begin to buckle on the 21st floor, the New York Police Department said. The workers evacuated the building on their own. Within hours, the city had emptied the tower and shut down a wide stretch of Midtown East, bringing one of New York City’s most ambitious housing redevelopment projects to a standstill.

The building at 235 East 42nd Street, at the corner of Second Avenue, is a 1960s office tower being transformed into housing as part of one of the city’s largest office-to-residential conversion projects. At a Tuesday afternoon briefing, Mayor Zohran Mamdani said two structural columns had buckled, several upper floors were sagging, and cracks had opened on the 21st floor. He described the situation as extremely serious and said the building continued shifting after city inspectors arrived.

Fire Chief John Esposito said the steel columns had begun to bend and deflect and that the structure was still moving while emergency crews remained on scene. While officials said a full collapse into surrounding streets appeared unlikely, they warned that a localized internal collapse remained possible. Fire Commissioner Lillian Bonsignore said the FDNY deployed approximately 150 firefighters and EMS personnel along with more than 50 emergency units to stabilize the situation.

The NYPD established what officials called a frozen zone, closing streets from 40th through 45th Streets between First and Third Avenues to both pedestrians and vehicles. Seven nearby buildings were evacuated as a precaution, including the Hampton Inn Manhattan Grand Central at 231 East 43rd Street, where hotel guests were removed from their rooms, and the Kennedy International School at 225 East 43rd Street, which was operating a summer camp serving approximately 400 children. The Israeli Consulate at 800 Second Avenue was also evacuated.

Authorities confirmed that no injuries were reported and that every construction worker had safely exited the building.

The implications extend far beyond a single Midtown block.

The former Pfizer headquarters is the centerpiece of 235 GC LLC’s redevelopment plan to create approximately 1,600 apartments, including more than 400 affordable housing units, in what developers and project architect Gensler have described as the largest office-to-residential conversion in New York City history. The development has become a centerpiece of the city’s effort to convert aging office towers into desperately needed housing as remote work reshapes Manhattan’s commercial real estate market.

The project is being developed by Metro Loft, led by veteran conversion developer Nathan Berman, together with David Werner Real Estate Investments. GACE Consulting Engineers serves as the project’s structural engineer. Financing totals hundreds of millions of dollars, including a $720 million construction loan provided by Madison Realty Capital in May 2025, in addition to earlier financing arranged through the Northwind Group. Any prolonged shutdown or major redesign could delay completion beyond the current 2027 target and increase project costs.

In a statement, a Metro Loft spokesperson thanked first responders, emphasized that public safety remains the company’s highest priority, and said the structural issues are confined to a limited section of one of the project’s two buildings. The company also stated that the overall structure is not believed to be at risk of complete collapse, consistent with the assessment provided by FDNY officials.

City officials offered a preliminary explanation for the failure. The building had been expanded to 37 stories, and as additional weight was added above the 21st floor, load-bearing columns experienced increased structural stress. A union tradesman at the scene, Cliff Johnson of Steamfitters Local 638, alleged that foundation work supporting the additional height had not been performed properly, though city officials have not reached any conclusions regarding the cause.

The development also carries an existing regulatory history. According to Department of Buildings records, the construction entity associated with the project received seven safety violations during 2025 totaling more than $32,000 in penalties. One citation issued in December carried a $10,000 fine for allegedly failing to notify the department of an incident involving serious injury or death.

By Tuesday evening, officials reported cautious progress. The Department of Buildings said inspectors had completed an initial assessment of the damaged area and authorized contractors to begin installing temporary shoring to stabilize the affected columns. Officials said the damaged structural members had shown no additional movement since the morning inspection. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Development Leila Bozorg told reporters around 4 p.m. that the building had remained stable for several hours, describing that development as encouraging. Residents of one evacuated building, located at 222 East 44th Street, were later allowed to return home.

Officials cautioned that stabilization work would continue overnight and that there was no timetable for reopening surrounding streets or allowing displaced residents, hotel guests and businesses to return. Governor Kathy Hochul said she remained in contact with city officials and confirmed that state building inspectors had joined the response.

For now, the Midtown project that was expected to showcase New York City’s effort to transform vacant office towers into housing has instead become a costly reminder of the engineering, financial and construction risks that accompany some of the largest redevelopment projects in the country.

JBizNews Desk | New York

© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or distribution without written permission is prohibited.

On:

Several former Stockton Mortgage Corp. employees have denied allegations that they misappropriated trade secrets and interfered with the company’s business after leaving to join competitor Ixonia Bancshares, operating as Novus Home Mortgage, according to court filings.

Eighteen defendants filed their answers Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, responding to a third amended complaint filed by Stockton Mortgage on June 22.

The suit, initially filed by Stockton in October 2025, accuses 18 former employees and Novus of orchestrating the departure of employees and “defecting en masse,” as well as violations of their nonsolicitation and confidentiality agreements.

The amended complaint called the case a “nefarious conspiracy” and a “months-long covert scheme to divert active and prospective borrowers of SMC to Novus.”

“In the course of their illicit actions, Defendants stole SMC’s intellectual property, as well as confidential and proprietary borrower data, resulting in the tortious interference with SMC’s actual and expected business relationships,” the amended complaint stated.

In the July 6 filings, defendants admitted that they resigned from Stockton Mortgage and later accepted employment with Novus in the same or similar roles. They denied, however, that they engaged in wrongdoing, including claims of breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference and civil conspiracy.

The defendants also denied allegations that they improperly interfered with Stockton Mortgage’s business relationships or business expectancies, and they disputed the company’s request for damages and other relief. Novus also denied any wrongdoing.

The filings argue that Stockton Mortgage failed to state valid legal claims, suffered no compensable damages and failed to adequately identify any protectable trade secrets.

In addition, the defendants denied using or disclosing any trade secrets belonging to Stockton Mortgage. They argued that any information the company claims as confidential was either publicly available, lacked independent economic value or was not adequately protected to qualify for trade secret status.

Each defendant asked the court to dismiss the claims against them, award their attorneys’ fees and litigation costs, and grant a jury trial on all issues eligible for one. All of the filings, aside from Novus’s, were made by Daniel J. Wisniewski, the counsel for the individual defendants.

Neither Stockton, Novus’s legal team nor Wisniewski returned HousingWire‘s requests for comment at the time of publication.

The filings represent each defendant’s response to the allegations and do not constitute a ruling on the merits of the case. The litigation remains pending.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Gotham FC, the reigning National Women’s Soccer League champions, will make Queens their permanent home alongside the New York City Football Club (NYCFC). On Tuesday, Gov. Kathy Hochul and Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced the team’s move from New Jersey to Etihad Park, the city’s first-ever professional soccer stadium under construction in Willets Point, in 2028. The fully electric stadium, designed by HOK, is slated to open for NYCFC’s season next spring, establishing Queens as a major hub for soccer across the five boroughs.

Courtesy of Gotham FC

Developed by NYCFC, Related Companies, and Sterling Equities, the seven-story stadium topped out in March. The venue will feature 25,000 seats and dedicated spaces for Gotham FC, including its own locker room and club merchandise area.

Located across from Citi Field, the stadium will feature a striking, “activated cube” entranceway, which will be illuminated on match days with vibrant colors and imagery to provide a dynamic experience for visitors. S9 Architecture and Turner Construction Company are design and construction partners on the project, as 6sqft previously reported.

“From Sam Kerr’s legendary four-goal comeback to Midge Purce’s championship-clinching heroics, Gotham FC has given us some of the greatest moments in women’s soccer,” Mamdani said. “Now the next electrifying chapter of that story will be written in NYC.”

“Bringing Gotham FC to Queens means that the young girl kicking a ball around Jackson Heights, Jamaica or the South Bronx will be able to take the train and watch some of the best players in the world in her own city,” he added.

Credit: NYCFC

Gotham FC has been playing in Harrison at Sports Illustrated Stadium since 2020. The team’s relocation to Etihad Park aims to match the ambitions of the club itself, a two-time NWSL champion and the reigning league titleholder.

Carolyn Tisch Blodgett, governor of Gotham FC, said the move reflects the club’s commitment to its fans and the continued growth of women’s sports.

“From day one, our ambition has been bigger than championships,” she said. “We are building one of the world’s most iconic clubs and helping define the future of women’s sports. Our move to Etihad Park reflects that ambition.”

“World-class athletes deserve world-class environments, and this move allows us to keep raising the standard for our players, supporters and the game itself,” she added. “Gotham FC is showing what is possible when you invest boldly in women’s soccer, and we are committed to building an experience worthy of the fans who have believed in this club from the beginning.”

NYC Mayor’s Office

Building on the club’s growing investments, Gotham FC is set to receive a new state-of-the-art training hub in Whippany, New Jersey, designed by SHoP Architects next summer.

Announced last month, the project will transform the former New York Red Bulls training facility into a purpose-built hub focused on player performance, recovery, and well-being. It will be among the first facilities to meet the NWSL’s new training standards.

Gotham FC is also set to face the Washington Spirit at Citi Field on July 15 in a rematch of one of women’s professional soccer’s biggest rivalries. The match will mark the first women’s sporting event held at the home of the New York Mets and will take place four days before the men’s FIFA World Cup final at MetLife Stadium.

RELATED:

The post Gotham FC will move to Queens in 2028 first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

North Carolina housing advocates have tried for years to pass state-level zoning reform. They kept falling short.

Broad reforms met the same fate in the recently ended session – except one: parking reform. What started as a stormwater management bill became one of the most aggressive parking reforms in the country.

It passed with rare bipartisan force. A diverse coalition backed it, ranging from the Sierra Club to Americans for Prosperity to small farmers.

How it passed could serve as a model for coalition building.

Gov. Josh Stein signed the bill Monday. It eliminates most off-street parking requirements statewide for commercial and residential development, effective Jan. 1. The law follows a path other states and cities have increasingly taken to make new housing more affordable. California led the way, and other states and cities have followed.

The Parking Lot Reform and Modernization Act builds on what several North Carolina cities have already implemented. It bars local governments from requiring developers to build a minimum number of parking spaces, whether for commercial or residential projects. It also lets local governments offer incentives, including tax breaks, to developers who add stormwater controls. Coastal counties are exempt, a late addition addressing concerns about vacation-rental parking.

“This is a huge economic driver in addition to driving down the cost for surface park spaces for a home, which averages $5,000 to $10,000 per space, and a parking deck space that would be anywhere from $25,000 to $65,000,” State Rep. Donnie Loftis, a lead bill sponsor, said during a June 30 floor speech.

In a surge of bipartisan spirit, lawmakers also passed a full budget for the first time in more than 1,000 days.

Years in the making

House Bill 162 was built on a predecessor, House Bill 369, which passed the House unanimously in June 2025. That version stalled in the Senate. Lawmakers revived it this year, adding the coastal exemption to secure broader support.

North Carolina cities set the precedent for this reform. Raleigh eliminated its own parking minimums in March 2022, and Durham and Gastonia followed. Charlotte still enforces mandates, making it an outlier under the new law.

The House voted 111-2 on June 30 to concur with Senate changes, sending the bill to Stein’s desk. The Senate had approved it 44-1 a week earlier.

An unusual coalition

The bill drew support from a “strange bedfellows” mix of environmentalists, developers and housing advocates. Loftis said during his floor speech that the coalition included more than 130 groups, rattling off a list that spanned Realtors, developers, the apartment association, small business groups, “tree huggers” and “dirt pushers.”

Local governments have historically fought state preemption, but Loftis said they backed this bill, too.

“We had the spectrum from the far left to the far right and anything in between to get this bill across the finish line,” Ryan Carter, policy director for conservation group Catawba Riverkeeper and lead on the bill, told HousingWire TBD. “The broader coalition sealed the deal.”

His group spearheaded the effort because reducing pavement can also cut stormwater runoff and flooding.

“The worst thing you can do for the environment is build a parking lot,” Carter said.

Part of a larger push

A broader Democratic housing package introduced this spring sought to cap corporate ownership of single-family homes at 25 properties and allow residential construction in all commercially zoned areas.

House Bill 1056 stalled in the House Appropriations Committee after its April 28 referral. It carried 29 Democratic sponsors and no Republican support. Lawmakers split off the parking provision, a strategy that ultimately succeeded.

Supporters say the parking law could ease affordability pressure by lowering construction costs. Critics note it doesn’t mandate new housing – it only removes a regulatory obstacle.

Still, the near-unanimous votes mark a rare consensus in a Republican-controlled legislature that had resisted broader housing intervention. Backers say the bill proves that narrower, bipartisan reforms can succeed where sweeping packages tend to fail.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Compass recently added Palm Beach luxury real estate professional Daniel Ekerold to its Florida roster, the brokerage said Tuesday.

Ekerold, who is coming to Compass from Douglas Elliman, is known for working with ultra-high-net-worth clients, hedge fund principals, developers and investors, according to the company announcement.

In 2025, Ekerold closed eight transaction sides worth $17.84 million, earning him the No. 816 rank in the state for sales volume, in the 2026 RealTrends Verified rankings.

For Ekerold and his team, the move to Compass comes as they look to expand their footprint in Palm Beach and across South Florida.

“In this business, trust and discretion are everything,” Ekerold said. “Clients want someone who can anticipate challenges, communicate clearly and execute at a high level. That’s always been the foundation of how we operate.”

Originally from South Africa, Ekerold is a graduate of the University of Cape Town. Before entering real estate, he served in the Royal Marines, worked aboard private mega yachts, built and operated service companies and led a nonprofit organization.

“Daniel Ekerold is another great addition to Compass,” Adam Vellano, principal broker of Florida at Compass, said in the announcement. “Daniel’s hyper-local market pulse and turnkey concierge approach make him one of the most knowledgeable agents in the area, and we are proud to welcome him to the team.”

This article was written by Brooklee Han and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The hearing regarding Zillow’s motion for a preliminary injunction in its ongoing antitrust battle with Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) and Compass International Holdings may have concluded last Thursday, but the parties are still waiting for an answer. 

This week, all three parties must file post-hearing briefs by Thursday with any replies to another party’s brief due by the following Monday. But while last week’s hearing primarily focused on Zillow’s motion for a preliminary injunction that would prevent MRED from suspending its IDX and VOW listing data feeds to Zillow, the greater lawsuit rests on Zillow’s claim that MRED and Compass conspired to cut off the listing portal’s access to the Chicagoland MLS listing feed.

And it is this antitrust argument that Judge John Tharp will be examining when he rules on Zillow motion, as in order to be awarded a preliminary injunction, a plaintiff must show that it would be irreparably harmed without it and that it is likely to prevail at trial.

Zillow makes its case 

Over the course of the two-day hearing, Zillow sought to show the court that MRED and Compass had worked together to suspend Zillow’s listing feed. The listing portal argued that MRED “changed” the “objective criteria” participants are used to filter its IDX listing data to target Zillow and its listing access standards policy at the behest of Compass and that the MLS suspended Zillow’s listing feed not because of a neutral rule violation, but because Zillow’s policy threatened Compass’s business model.

Under Zillow’s policy, listings are banned from Zillow if they are not available for display on IDX or VOW feed powered websites within one business day of the property being publicly marketed, which impacts listings Compass markets as private exclusives before taking them public via the MLS, as the firm advertises the existence of these listings in a “black box” on its site.  

Zillow also argued that its policy is pro-competitive and good for consumers because it promoted transparency and provides consumers with access to all available inventory, while MRED’s enforcement of its IDX display rule resulting in the suspension of Zillow’s feed hurt consumers, reduced transparency and protects Compass from competition. 

Zillow attempted to illustrate its arguments by showing communications between Compass and MRED leaders and questioning leaders at both firms about these communications. 

MRED claims neutrality

MRED stressed that the its “objective criteria” rule is neutral and the result of the  2008 settlement between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the National Association of Realtors (NAR), that prevented MLSs from selectively hiding listings from consumer-facing web portals and not concerted action with Compass. Under the policy, IDX participants may filter listings only using objective criteria, such as geography, price, property type and listing type. However, according to MRED’s arguments, Zillow was filtering listings based on marketing history, which is not one of the criteria allowed under the policy. 

Additionally, Rebecca Jensen, MRED’s CEO, noted in her testimony that MRED has been working toward expanding nationally since she took the helm at the MLS over a decade ago and that these aspirations did not simply come about because Compass offered a pathway toward rapid national expansion. 

Testimony also showed that in the view of the Chicagoland MLS, Zillow, not Compass, is the one attempting to dictate industry policy through its listing access standards. 

Jensen also said she was “disgusted” by Zillow’s admission in planning documents that it knew that its listing access standards policy may violate the IDX display rules of some MLSs, yet they went through with deploying the policy anyway.

Who is the anticompetitive one?

As for Compass, the Robert Reffkin-helmed firm also pushed back on Zillow’s claims that it conspired with MRED, with its attorney arguing that Compass acted unilaterally and lawfully when it complained to MRED and other MLSs about Zillow’s listing bans. During his testimony on Thursday, Reffkin said that Zillow executives repeatedly said they would not allow brokers to market listings outside Zillow and that Zillow offered Compass financial incentives if it stopped promoting off-portal marketing strategies.

He also testified that Zillow executives warned they would use “carrots and sticks” to stop marketing outside Zillow. Reffkin argued that this was anticompetitive as it sought to protect Zillow’s business model while harming others businesses. 

The brokerage defendant also argued that Zillow’s policy not only interferes with a seller’s ability to choose how they market a property, but also does not increase listing transparency, as the firm claims the policy punishes competing public marketplaces rather than hidden listings. 

The waiting game

Judge Tharp will take all of these arguments as well as those outlined in the post-hearing motions and replies all parties will file by next Monday. It is unknown how long the court will take to rule on the motion, but it may take weeks if not months for the parties to have an answer. 

In a July 2 entry on the court docket, Judge Tharp noted that both Zillow’s motion for a preliminary injunction and MRED’s motion to compel arbitration, remained under advisement.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

On an unassuming Brooklyn block near the banks of the re-emergent Gowanus Canal, this one-of-a-kind property at 128 2nd Street includes two free-standing buildings connected by a common backyard. The resulting 4,500 square feet of interior space on an L-shaped double lot adds up to a modern urban compound that goes beyond townhouse living. Asking $6,750,000, the property includes a beautifully renovated three-story townhouse plus a garage, open studio space, and two residential lofts for rental income opportunities.

The century-old townhouse has been re-imagined from top to bottom with an eye for modern design. Twenty-first-century additions include custom millwork, radiant-heated wide plank wood floors, and a passive heating system, French drains, central air, architectural staircases, and walls of glass.

The home’s primary living space offers its own creative surprise in the organic form of “the bubble,” a functional sculpture that emerges from the living room wall, offering a cozy reading nook with an integrated wood-burning fireplace. It’s the perfect spot to curl up for a nap or an afternoon read.

The large, open kitchen is a showcase of modern design, with Viking and Miele appliances, stone countertops, and custom millwork. A dining area has room for 10. Also on this floor is a powder room that continues the industrial-meets-organic vibe.

At the back of this open space, a wall of accordion glass reveals a landscaped backyard. An ipe wood deck borders a green lawn surrounded by ferns, vines, and flowering plants.

Up an architectural stair, a spacious bedroom suite adjoins an open living space. Architectural flourishes include built-in shelving and a stainless steel wet bar.

On the top floor is the primary bedroom suite with a spacious walk-in closet. The attendant primary bath is a verdant sanctuary with a built-in terrarium and a skylight. A second bedroom and bath complete this floor.

Down a lighted path off the backyard, the second structure is a 20-foot-by-40-foot building, also with three floors. A curb-cut leads to a roll-up garage door and indoor parking for two vehicles in an open garage that could easily be used for gallery space or grand-scale entertaining.

The two floors above comprise floor-through lofts, each with a kitchen, bathrooms, and a private balcony. One of the two offers a separate bedroom and laundry facilities.

[Listing: 128 2nd Street, #COMPOUND by Bruce Goveia and Brian K. Meier of Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices New York Properties]

RELATED:

The post This $6.75M Gowanus compound combines a townhouse, gallery, garage, and lofts in one unusual property first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Mortgage rates took a brief U-turn last week, but they resumed their upward path again this week as hawkish statements from the Federal Reserve over inflation and monetary policy are guiding the direction of borrowing costs.

At HousingWire‘s Mortgage Rates Center on Tuesday, rates for 30-year conforming loans averaged 6.77%, up 4 basis points from one week ago. Rates for 30-year jumbo loans were up 9 bps to 6.75%, while 30-year loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) rose 6 bps to 6.35%.

The figures represent a reversal of what happened last week as rates fell across the board.

“Last week’s modest decline in mortgage rates helped sustain borrower interest, with home purchase demand up slightly and continuing to outpace last year’s levels,” Bob Broeksmit, president and CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA), said in written commentary.

“Buyers are benefiting from a more balanced housing market as inventory improves and home-price growth moderates in many areas. If these trends continue, they should bolster housing activity through the summer.”

Inflation and home price growth

The Fed isn’t alone in its inflationary concerns. On Tuesday, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York released its Survey of Consumer Expectations for June. The responses from roughly 1,300 households showed that consumers believe the rising inflation trends of the past several months will continue over the short and medium term.

The New York Fed’s report said that median inflation expectations for one year from now increased to 3.7% in June, up from 3.5% in May and the highest level for the monthly survey since September 2023. In May, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) climbed to an annual rate of 4.2%, the fastest pace of growth since April 2023. CPI figures for June will be released July 14.

But the survey also found that median estimates for home price growth dropped to 3.2% annually, down from 3.5% in May and slightly above the 12-month trailing average of 3.1%. Moderate price appreciation across much of the country continues to be a tailwind for housing market growth, despite mortgage rates that remain near the higher end of 2026 forecasts.

Home price data released Tuesday by Cotality showed year-over-year growth of 0.8% in May. Pockets of hotter growth were found in Midwest states like Illinois, Indiana and Nebraska, where annual appreciation ranged from 5% to 5.9%. San Francisco had the highest growth among the country’s 100 largest metro areas at 8.9%, followed by Chicago at 6.2%. Contrary to consumer beliefs, the company expects national price growth to accelerate to 4.8% by April 2027.

At the other end of the spectrum, Cotality noted that markets like Austin (-2.8%) and Cape Coral, Florida (-3.3%) “appear to have hit their price floors” as monthly changes this spring are nearly flat and indicate “active stabilization.”

“The U.S. housing market in mid-2026 remains firmly entrenched in a geographic split, shaped fundamentally by an affordability gap and a wealth gap that continues to divide buyers across the nation,” Cotality chief economist Selma Hepp said in a statement.

“On one hand, buyers who are well-insulated from mortgage rate volatility — bolstered by substantial accumulated home equity and robust wealth gains — are continuing to look at high-value regions like San Francisco, driving a strong near-9% annual rebound in a market that remains fundamentally healthy and structurally undervalued relative to long-term income baselines. On the other hand, elevated mortgage rates, property taxes, insurance and other costs of homeownership continue to keep buyers out of the market.” 

Ishbia on the Fed, FHA rules and GSE condo loans

In his monthly “3 Points” video released last week, Mat Ishbia, chairman and CEO of United Wholesale Mortgage (UWM), touched on a few topics tied to mortgage affordability and availability.

Ishbia mentioned the first meeting of the Federal Reserve under new Chair Kevin Warsh. While the central bank in June held benchmark rates steady for a fourth straight meeting and officials are now indicating a rate hike is more likely than a cut in 2026, Ishbia has a different line of thinking.

“The next six to 12 months, it’s going to be more bullish — as in lower rate opportunity — with Kevin Warsh running it than the previous Fed chairman,” Ishbia said, referencing Jerome Powell.

“When this war [in Iran] ends, the CPI data slows down a little bit, there’s a big opportunity for rates to come down … which means refinance opportunity and a positive thing for the mortgage market and for consumers.”

Ishbia also believes the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development‘s recent request for information about potential changes to minimum property requirements for FHA loans will be beneficial for the market, if adopted. The last major changes to these regulations occurred more than 20 years ago, and the mortgage industry has sought less stringent regulations for repair conditions, second appraisals and more.

“There’s some unnecessary burdens and things that are maybe outweighing the benefits that [FHA loans] provide, and so they’re really digging into this,” Ishbia said. “The fact that they’re looking at it, asking for public comment, is a positive thing across the board, because they’re saying, ‘Hey, we understand that maybe our policies are a little outdated. We can make this process better.’”

He also touched on pending regulations from the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) for condominium projects. Some industry professionals are pushing to delay changes by a year, Ishbia said, over worries that more of these loans will become nonwarrantable under Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac standards. The National Association of Mortgage Brokers (NAMB) are among those opposed to ending the limited review process in favor of higher due-diligence requirements.

“Overall, the industry is saying, ‘We understand what you’re trying to do, but we’ve got to delay this because it’s going to cause a major disruption in the condo market,’” Ishbia said.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

One Raven has launched a new smart home operating system designed to keep most home automation functions local to the property rather than dependent on cloud connectivity, according to a company announcement.

The platform is aimed at homebuilders and residential developers who want to offer integrated smart home packages that emphasize privacy, reliability and long-term serviceability. Instead of routing every device command through remote servers, One Raven uses an on-premise hub as the control layer and only reaches the cloud when needed for updates, remote access or integrations.

For builders, the company is positioning the system as a way to offer a more robust whole-home technology package with less ongoing risk from vendor lock-in or cloud outages. A local-first architecture can reduce latency, maintain basic functionality during internet interruptions and limit the amount of homeowner data transmitted offsite – all issues that have become more visible as smart home ecosystems have matured and large tech platforms have revised products or shut down services.

One Raven’s model is to provide a centralized software layer that can work with a range of devices and brands, rather than a single-vendor stack. That approach is meant to give builders more flexibility in specifying hardware by price point or community standard while still delivering a unified experience for the homeowner through a single app and in-home hub.

Why this matters for homebuilders

Smart homes have moved from optional upgrades to standard expectations in many new communities, but builders are increasingly sensitive to post-closing support, cybersecurity and long-term compatibility. A system that keeps core automation functions running locally can help reduce service calls tied to internet or cloud issues and may lower liability around data practices, while still allowing builders to market connected-home features as a differentiator in a slower for-sale environment.

The launch comes as building products and technology firms race to align with standards like Matter and to define who “owns” the ongoing relationship with the homeowner – the builder, the device maker or a third-party platform. One Raven is attempting to stake out a role as that neutral platform layer focused on privacy and resilience, which could appeal to regional and production builders who want a branded smart home package without fully ceding control to a big tech ecosystem.

For builders evaluating smart home partners, key questions will include which device ecosystems One Raven supports today, how it handles commissioning at scale in new-home communities and what post-close support model is offered to minimize callbacks for the builder’s warranty team.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become nearly ubiquitous across the real estate industry, yet most professionals say the technology has not meaningfully improved their work, according to a July briefing from Fyxer.

The report found that 90% of surveyed real estate professionals use AI in some capacity, reflecting an industry that has embraced the technology rapidly.

Despite widespread adoption, only 35% of respondents said AI is genuinely helpful, creating a 55-percentage-point gap between usage and perceived value — the largest among industries analyzed in Fyxer’s broader AI Productivity Trap Report.

Researchers surveyed 89 real estate professionals and compared their responses with a broader sample of 2,000 U.S. office workers.

Generic tools dominate agent workflows

The report suggests many real estate professionals rely on general-purpose AI instead of software built specifically for the industry.

Adoption of sector-specific AI tools for MLS and property research, market analysis and client matching ranges from just 21% to 25%. Instead, most respondents reported using generic chatbots and research assistants.

Researchers said generic AI can draft emails and generate content but lacks the built-in understanding of property data, client history and transaction workflows that specialized platforms provide.

Real estate professionals also trail U.S. office workers in regular use of nearly every AI tool category except chat tools.

Administrative work remains a major burden

The industry’s heavy administrative workload makes it particularly well suited for AI.

Time spent managing client communications is 32 percentage points higher than the cross-sector average, while email ranks as the second-largest administrative time drain after client communication.

However, adoption of AI for email remains relatively limited. Only 39% of respondents use AI to write or reply to emails and just 23% use it to read incoming messages.

Researchers identified email automation as one of the largest untapped opportunities for improving productivity.

The report also cited Morgan Stanley’s estimate that AI could generate $34 billion in efficiency gains across the real estate sector by 2030.

Integration could unlock greater productivity

Fyxer found that one in five real estate professionals operates AI tools separately from primary workflows instead of using integrated systems.

Overall, 64% reported using integrated AI tools, compared with 73% among the broader sample of U.S. office workers. Standalone AI use also was higher in real estate, at 36% versus 27%.

Researchers said integrated platforms that connect with MLS data, market information and communication workflows can reduce the need to edit or fact-check AI-generated work.

Nearly half of respondents, 47%, identified reviewing AI outputs for accuracy as their biggest AI-related time drain, 5.2 percentage points higher than the broader survey sample.

The report found office workers using fully integrated AI tools were 63 percentage points more productive than those relying on standalone applications.

Researchers also identified signs that so-called “AI superworkers” are emerging in real estate.

Although the findings are directional because of the limited sample size, 21% of respondents said AI has transformed their work, suggesting broader productivity gains may depend less on AI adoption itself than on selecting integrated, industry-specific tools embedded throughout daily workflows for agents.

This article was written by Jonathan Delozier and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation. It was reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

When the National Association of Realtors (NAR) asked its members to help the trade group identify misuses of its trademarks during the association’s legislative meeting late last month, it unsurprisingly stirred up reactions among real estate professionals. 

“While agents are fighting for listings in the toughest market in years, NAR just spent its midyear meetings policing how you use the word ‘Realtor,’” Kathy Govoreau, a Las Vegas-based agent at Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices Nevada Properties, wrote on Facebook. “Here’s where I have to ask the obvious question: is this really the next hill NAR is going to stand on???” 

Govoreau’s comments came after a presentation by Leslie Nettleford-Freeman, NAR’s associate general counsel and vice president of legal affairs and brand protection, at the trade group’s midyear meeting. The association noted that members have been required to “cooperate and coordinate with NAR in any and all attempts to halt or prevent any unauthorized or improper use of the marks” under its bylaws for years. 

Bigger fish to fry

Across social media, the reaction from the majority of industry professionals seems to be that there are other, larger issues they wish NAR would address. 

“NAR sent its trademark attorney to the Realtors Legislative Meetings to talk about lapel pins. Take the pin off. Put it in your pocket. That was the guidance,” Wendy Forsythe, the chief operating officer at eXp Realty, wrote in a post on  LinkedIn. “Meanwhile, agents are navigating commission lawsuits, MLS data integrity questions, AI disruption in lead generation, and a buyer pool that’s been sidelined by affordability for going on three years.

“NAR’s CEO [Nykia Wright] has said trust with members will be earned back through action. This is the action: a seven-stage brand protection plan and an AI tool to scan for trademark misuse.”

Forsythe noted that association members pay attention to what’s talked about on stage at meetings like this. Although protecting the Realtor trademark from becoming generic is “a real legal question,” she does not believe it is a “top-five problem” for the industry. 

Amit Kulkarni, a co-founder of Alloy Advisors, shared a similar view in a post on LinkedIn, in which he wrote that he was “bewildered” by the news about NAR’s increased trademark usage enforcement. 

“NAR is legally obligated to defend the ‘Realtor’ mark. I get it. Fine. But they chose to make trademark hygiene a headline at their legislative meetings, highlighting a reporting form, a “self-correct” campaign, and put the cherry on top by encouraging members to rat on other members,” he wrote. “And this is at the same time that the MLS is fragmenting, Clear Cooperation is collapsing, and the private-listing situation is fully out of control with no real governance or rules for any participants to point to.” 

According to Kulkarni, if NAR wants to “elevate the Realtor brand” as it has described in its 2026-2028 Strategic Plan, it should focus on things like increasing the standard required to enter the industry. 

“You can’t make ‘Realtor’ mean quality when the bar to become one is as little as 60 hours of coursework and a multiple-choice exam,” Kulkarni wrote.

Jason Peck, an eXp Realty-brokered agent, noted in a comment on Kulkarni’s post that protecting a trademark and elevating a brand are not the same thing. 

“If the goal is for consumers to associate ‘Realtor’ with higher-quality representation, the larger conversation has to be standards, competence, transparency, and measurable consumer outcomes,” Peck wrote. “Correcting language may protect the trademark. It does not, by itself, strengthen the value proposition behind it.”

How NAR is using AI

In addition to asking members to fill out its Brand Infringement Intake Form if they come across unauthorized uses of the Realtor brand, NAR has also publicly stated that it was “leveraging AI tools to strengthen brand protection, allowing NAR to identify trademark infringement earlier than ever before and take appropriate action.”

Although this was noted in NAR’s 2025 Annual Report, the point is one that some disgruntled industry professionals have latched onto in the discussion about increased trademark protections. 

In a post on LinkedIn, Chicago-based agent Steven Koleno shared an opinion article written by Wendy Gilch, the founder of Selling Later and a fellow at the Consumer Policy Center. Gilch argued that this is an example of NAR focusing its efforts on the wrong thing, and Koleno wrote that he “couldn’t agree more.” 

“If AI is going to be used, don’t use it to hunt down trademark violations. Use it to identify misleading consumer claims. Use it to flag agents telling buyers their services are ‘free.’ Use it to flag agents claiming there’s a ‘standard commission.’ Use it to flag misleading compensation conversations, steering, hidden incentives, and advice that puts industry interests ahead of consumer interests,” Koleno wrote. 

He added that consumers “don’t care who owns a trademark,” but they do care about trusting the professional they’ve hired to guide them through what may be the largest financial decision of their lives. 

The bright side

Although much of the industry feedback to this move by NAR has been negative, some industry professionals have posted on social media to support the move.

“Realtor is very quickly on the path of Kleenex, Xerox, Coke and many other brand names that had become the name for the generic,” Nick Nowak, a New Jersey-based managing broker at eXp Realty, wrote in a post on LinkedIn.

“NAR has defended lawsuits in the past, and have only been able to keep their trademark, due to active enforcement. That enforcement is part of a defensible position when a legal claim arises again. So I don’t bemoan the enforcement of the term.”

But Nowak agreed that NAR could be putting its resources toward other things like searching for noncompliant members making false claims in their advertising. 

Brian Phillips, a New York-based associate broker at Douglas Elliman, noted in his post on LinkedIn that he was “encouraged” to see NAR taking a more “proactive approach” to protecting its trademarks.

“Trademarks can lose their legal protection when the public begins using them as the generic name for a product or, in this case, a profession,” he wrote. “That makes me wonder whether earlier and more consistent trademark enforcement could have reduced some of the confusion between ‘Realtor’ and ‘real estate agent’ that exists today.

“If the Realtor trademark is worth protecting, then it should be used only by those who are NAR members and who have accepted the professional and ethical responsibilities that come with that membership.” 

As part of NAR’s 2026-2028 Strategic Plan, the group released a multipart trademark video series to educate members and staff on proper trademark usage. It also offers a trademark toolkit for associations and members which includes turnkey social media assets that promote correct usage of the trademark.

A NAR spokesperson issued a statement to HousingWire in which it defended increased efforts around trademark protection.

“Protecting the REALTOR® trademark has always been a core responsibility of the National Association of REALTORS®. The REALTOR® brand is one of our members’ most valuable assets. It helps our members get to their next transaction by distinguishing members, who must abide by the Code of Ethics and Professional Standards, from non-members which strengthens consumers’ preference for working with REALTORS®,” the statement read.

“NAR’s brand protection efforts are primarily focused on preventing unauthorized use of NAR’s trademarks by third parties. When trademark issues involve REALTOR® members, NAR looks to educate and provide guidance to encourage voluntary compliance. Trademark protection is just one example of the work our best-in-class legal team undertakes every day on behalf of members, alongside modernizing the Code of Ethics and Professional Standards, litigation advocacy, MLS resources, and other efforts that protect the interests of REALTORS® and the consumers they serve.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Why aren’t mortgage rates dropping as some people expected with oil prices lower? The 10-year yield this morning is trading at 4.51% and mortgage rates are still close to yearly highs, while oil prices are up this morning — but at $71, not over $100.

Well, the Federal Reserve hawks are running the show and they have been vocal about it. Three Federal Reserve members have come out with hawkish outlooks recently, all after oil prices have fallen sharply. I understand that people were told that as soon as oil prices fell, rates would fall with them, but right now we have had such a shift in Fed policy that the old playbook doesn’t work right now until we see some changes.

Let’s take a look at the recent statements, as one more Fed hawk has chimed in.

Statements from Fed hawks:

Minneapolis Fed President Neil Kashkari at the Aspen Ideas Festival on June 26:

  • “I have penciled in one rate hike in 2026.”

Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack on CNBC June 30:

  • “If consumer data holds up, Fed policy may not be restrictive enough.”
  • “Inflation is still too high, Fed may need to consider rate hikes.”
  • “Job market is right around full employment, growth looks good.”

Yesterday, Fed Governor Christoper Waller threw his hat into the ring:

  • “So I was willing to tolerate a longer movement back toward 2% target based on the labor market. But … those risks have completely flipped around now. Labor market seems to be stabilizing in the U.S., inflation’s been taking off. So then that changes how you might want to think about policy.”

Waller was the main ringleader of the doves last year as he was pushing for more rate cuts because the labor market was getting softer than the Fed should be comfortable with, but even he is hawkish now.

All of these Fed members could have said something different now that oil prices have fallen, but they haven’t, on purpose. This is their version of forward guidance to show everyone that inflation above 2% is a concern as long as the labor market is intact. I mean, last year was the lowest job growth in the 21st century and they were never at a neutral policy rate around 3%.

Conclusion

I know many consumers — along with their real estate agents and mortgage lenders — are frustrated, as they were told that falling oil prices would immediately mean mortgage rates would fall. Rates have fallen from this year’s peak, but we simply aren’t back to pre-conflict-level mortgage rates, and Fed policy has shifted.

Fed members need to sound more dovish, or economic data needs to worsen to see rates drop from here. Bond yields ticked up today as the weekly Redbook sales index, which has a good track record of correlating with retail sales data, showed 11.5% year-over-year growth. These kinds of data lines make certain Fed members less dovish with inflation above target.

chart visualization

The next Fed meeting is now going to be very critical because the Fed hawks will have to justify and explain their outlook now that some of their main concerns, rising oil prices and war, are off the table.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Rate announced on Tuesday that mortgage originator Ryan Randle has joined the company as it continues to expand its presence in the Denver market.

Randle brings more than 13 years of mortgage lending experience to the company after spending his career at U.S. Bank. According to the HousingWire Mortgage Rankings, Randle produced a total volume of nearly $30 million in 2025 with an average loan size of $712,131.

In a statement, Randle said he joined Rate because he was seeking an environment that would help him continue growing as a loan originator.

“I wasn’t looking to make a change simply for the sake of making one,” Randle said. “I wanted to be in an environment that would challenge me to become an even better originator. Rate has assembled some of the best loan officers in the country, and being surrounded by that level of talent gives me the opportunity to continue growing, learning and taking my business to the next level.”

Todd Heaton, executive vice president and Western U.S. divisional manager at Rate, said Randle’s experience and production record made him a strong addition to the company’s sales team.

“Ryan has built an outstanding reputation over more than a decade by consistently delivering for his clients and referral partners,” Heaton said in a statement. “The fact that someone with Ryan’s track record chose Rate speaks volumes about the culture we’ve built.

“The best originators want to work alongside other top performers, and that’s exactly what continues to set Rate apart. We’re thrilled to welcome Ryan to the team and excited to see what he’ll accomplish.”

Rate said the hire is part of its strategy to grow in key markets by recruiting experienced mortgage professionals.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Finance of America (FOA) said Tuesday that it has expanded its HomeSafe Second reverse mortgage product into Louisiana, Missouri, Rhode Island and Washington, D.C., bringing the product’s availability to a total of 18 states and the District of Columbia.

The expansion comes as more older homeowners seek ways to access home equity without refinancing existing low-rate mortgages or taking on required monthly mortgage payments associated with traditional home equity borrowing.

HomeSafe Second, reintroduced in 2023, is a second-lien reverse mortgage designed for homeowners ages 55 and older, although the minimum age is 60 in Washington and 62 in Texas. The product allows borrowers to tap a portion of their home equity while keeping their existing first mortgage in place.

Borrowers must continue to meet loan obligations such as payment of property taxes, homeowners insurance and other property-related expenses while maintaining the home.

Kristen Sieffert, president of Finance of America, said the company continues to see demand from both homeowners and loan officers for the product, particularly among borrowers who want to preserve existing mortgage rates while accessing housing wealth.

“Many homeowners have significant equity but limited ways to access it without adding a monthly payment or giving up a low mortgage rate,” Sieffert said in a statement. “Expanding HomeSafe Second to additional states, along with our technology-driven approach, gives more homeowners a practical way to strengthen their financial position in retirement.”

Finance of America said the expansion reflects growing interest in second-lien reverse mortgages as housing wealth has increased in many markets while retirees face higher living expenses, insurance premiums and property taxes.

The company said homeowners in markets such as Rhode Island and Washington, D.C., have benefited from home price appreciation but may have limited access to liquid assets, while retirees in states such as Missouri may be seeking additional financial flexibility without increasing monthly expenses.

The announcement follows a previous expansion in March, when FOA expanded access to the HomeSafe Second product into Indiana, Ohio and Michigan.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

As the fate of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act hangs in the balance, a new poll found that roughly nine in ten voters support the main provisions of the legislation. 

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) formally sent the bipartisan housing package back to the White House on June 29, setting in motion a 10-day countdown for President Trump to sign the bill, veto it or allow it to become law without his signature. With Sundays excluded from the countdown, the expected deadline for action is July 10.

After clearing the Senate, the latest version of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on June 23 by a margin of 358-32. The next day, President Donald Trump delayed a planned signing of the legislation, insisting that he would withhold action on the bill until Congress passes the SAVE America Act, which is aimed at strengthening voter ID requirements. 

Days after the delayed signing, President Trump may have ruffled some feathers in the housing industry when he referred to ROAD as “a big yawn” in comparison to the SAVE America Act. While Trump acknowledged that the SAVE America Act has dim prospects in Congress, he has still not signed ROAD into law. 

Still awaiting the Trump verdict, polling from the American Property Owners Alliance indicates that fully backing the legislation would be a political winner. 

Broad bipartisan support

The poll, which surveyed 800 registered voters between June 25 and June 27, presented respondents with five main goals of the bill:

  • Increase the supply of affordable housing
  • Convert vacant and abandoned buildings into housing
  • Expand access to small-dollar mortgages and lower-income buyer options
  • Restrict large corporate investors from buying single-family homes
  • Improve housing options and home loan access for veterans

After reviewing the proposals, 89% of voters said they support the comprehensive housing legislation, reflecting broad bipartisan backing. The measure drew strong support from across the political spectrum, including 87% of Republicans, 92% of Democrats and 91% of independents.

Another poll from the Bipartisan Policy Center, released in May, similarly found that 89% of voters agree that the House and U.S. Senate should work together to pass a bill aimed at lowering housing costs and building more affordable homes. Nearly 80% of respondents said that housing is their biggest expense, and that housing is an extremely or very important issue for them. 

The poll also asked voters about four key provisions in the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act:

  • 84% support expanding access to affordable home financing, including new and reformed lending programs. 
  • 77% support reforming federal rental assistance and other housing programs to more effectively help families afford housing. 
  • 76% support streamlining federal regulations to reduce costs and delays in building new homes. 
  • 65% support incentivizing state and local governments to change zoning and land-use policies to allow for more housing construction. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

A 37-story Midtown Manhattan tower under construction began buckling Tuesday morning, forcing the evacuation of at least nine surrounding buildings and shutting down a busy stretch of East 42nd Street a block from Grand Central Terminal. The Fire Department of New York said it received a call at 7:57 a.m. on July 7 reporting bricks falling from the 21st floor of the building at 235 East 42nd Street. When crews arrived, they determined that two structural columns had buckled. No injuries have been reported.

At an afternoon news conference, Mayor Zohran Mamdani said the structure remained unstable, warning that one of the columns had continued to move even after city officials reached the scene. “The building remains unstable,” Mamdani said, adding that engineers were assessing the situation “minute by minute.” The New York Police Department closed East 42nd Street between Second and Third Avenues to all foot and vehicle traffic, snarling one of the city’s busiest corridors near the Chrysler Building and the United Nations.

The high-rise is no ordinary construction site. It is the former global headquarters of Pfizer, which occupied the building for decades before selling it, and it is now the centerpiece of one of the largest office-to-residential conversions in New York City history. Construction workers on the 21st floor spotted the columns beginning to give way around 8 a.m. and were safely evacuated, according to police. City structural engineers from the Department of Buildings are investigating a report that a steel beam was compromised, a complaint the site safety manager filed the same morning.

The developer behind the project, Metro Loft Management, said it was working closely with the Department of Buildings to understand the full scope of the problem. “The safety of our workers and the public has always been, and remains, our top priority,” the firm said in a statement. Metro Loft, owned by real estate investors David Werner and Nathan Berman, is converting the aging tower — along with an adjoining building — into a rental complex of roughly 1,500 to 1,600 apartments. The architecture firm Gensler, which is leading the design, has described the building’s mixed 1960s-era structural systems as a uniquely difficult retrofit, with crews racing to pour a new floor every few days to hit a 2026 opening.

The building carries a history of code problems. City records show it has multiple active violations and tens of thousands of dollars in fines, with some complaints dating back years. What caused Tuesday’s failure will not be known until emergency trusses are installed and inspectors can examine the structure, the buildings commissioner said.

Beyond the immediate danger, the incident lands at a sensitive moment for New York’s real estate market. Office-to-residential conversions have been championed by city and state leaders as a rare fix for two problems at once: a glut of outdated, half-empty office towers and a severe shortage of housing that has pushed rents to punishing levels. The 42nd Street project has been held up as the flagship of that movement — billed as the biggest conversion the city has ever attempted, adding more than a dozen new stories atop the original tower.

Tuesday’s scare is likely to sharpen questions about the risks and costs hidden inside those ambitions. Converting a six-decade-old office building into modern apartments means cutting new window openings, removing interior structure and re-engineering floors that were never designed for residential use — delicate, expensive work on bones that are often unpredictable. When it goes smoothly, it turns dead office space into hundreds of homes and construction jobs. When it does not, as the buckling columns on 42nd Street showed, it can halt a neighborhood and put lives at risk.

The property’s ownership reflects how much institutional money rides on these deals. When the building last traded, in 2018, it was purchased for a reported $363.5 million by a group that included Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Deutsche Bank and the State of Wisconsin Investment Board, alongside Werner. Interior demolition began in 2024, with completion targeted for 2027.

For now, the priority is keeping the structure standing and the surrounding blocks clear. A school and a hotel were among the buildings emptied as a precaution, and commuters were urged to avoid the area. City officials said assessments would continue through the evening as engineers worked to stabilize the tower.

This is a developing story.

JBizNews Desk

© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or distribution without written permission is prohibited.

On:

Every brokerage leader has experienced the same frustration. An agent leaves, and only afterward, does the pattern of agent retention risk become obvious. The listings had closed. Nothing new was coming in. The conversations became less frequent. Then the resignation came.

That instinct is measurable. We measured it.

How we tested it

Most movement analyses are inherently backward-looking. They identify the agents who left and then analyze them after the move has already happened. The problem is that once an agent changes brokerages, it’s difficult to tell which characteristics led to the move and which were simply the result of it.

We approached the problem differently.

We identified every agent in our MLS coverage areas who closed at least one transaction during a 12-month period, more than 625,000 agents, and captured a snapshot of each one on a single date. For every agent, we recorded only two variables: the number of days since their most recent closing and the number of active listings they had at that moment.

We then followed those same agents over the next 12 months to answer one question: when they closed their next transaction, was it with the same brokerage or a different one?

There were no surveys, interviews or self-reported data, and no retrospective analysis. We measured each agent’s position at a fixed point in time and observed what happened next.

The study also includes every producing agent in the market, not just high-volume producers. One-deal and two-deal agents, who are often excluded from industry research, remained in the dataset. If an agent closed at least one transaction during the observation period, they were included.

The anchor effect

Here is what that forward test found:

image

Among agents who had closed within the previous three months and had three or more active listings, only 2.7% changed brokerages over the following year. At the other extreme, agents who had gone at least six months without a closing and had no active listings switched at a rate of 15.6%, nearly six times higher.

The pattern is remarkably consistent. Switching risk rises with every additional month since an agent’s last closing and falls with every additional listing in their pipeline. There isn’t a single reversal anywhere in the grid. The signal doesn’t simply exist, it compounds across both dimensions.

The implication is important. The agent in the upper-left corner of the chart is not necessarily happier, more loyal or better supported than the agent in the lower-right corner. They’re simply more invested in staying put. Active listings, pending transactions, future commission income, and a full pipeline all increase the cost of changing brokerages. As that pipeline shrinks, so does the cost of leaving.

That shifts the conversation from loyalty to timing.

Brokerages often ask, “Which agents are thinking about leaving?” A better question is, “Which agents are becoming free to leave?”

It’s strongest exactly where owners feel safest

The pattern doesn’t weaken among top producers. If anything, it becomes more pronounced.

Among agents closing 12 or more transactions annually, those with a recent closing and three or more active listings switched brokerages at a rate of just 2.3%. Those same high producers who had gone at least six months without a closing and had no active listings switched at 17.4%, more than seven times as often.

The same relationship appears across every production tier. Mid-producing agents ranged from 3.1% to 13.4%, while lower-volume producers ranged from 4.0% to 14.2%. Regardless of production level, the condition of an agent’s pipeline remained one of the strongest indicators of future brokerage movement.

image

This challenges one of the industry’s most common assumptions. High producers are not inherently more loyal than everyone else. They’re simply less likely to experience an empty pipeline. When they do, their behavior begins to resemble everyone else’s.

That moment matters disproportionately. Losing a top producer means losing a significant book of business, making early detection far more valuable than retrospective analysis.

The implication extends beyond agent retention risk. The same signal identifies both the agents most at risk of leaving your brokerage and the agents most likely to be receptive if they’re at a competing firm. Recruiting and retention are not separate problems. They’re the same signal viewed from opposite sides of the market.

The signal everyone misreads

Conventional wisdom says that agents become vulnerable after listings fall apart. Ask most brokers what signals an agent may be preparing to leave, and they’ll point to withdrawals, cancellations, or expired listings.

The data tells a different story.

We tested whether failed listings predicted brokerage movement by examining status-change records for every canceled, withdrawn, and expired listing before the observation date. Across every level of pipeline activity, agents who had experienced listing failures were less likely to change brokerages than agents with no failed listings at all.

Among agents with no active listings, 9.7% of those with no cancellations switched brokerages, compared with 8.0% of those who had experienced two or more cancellations.

The same pattern held among agents with three or more active listings, where switching fell from 5.3% to 1.3%. Even a cluster of cancellations immediately before the observation date showed no meaningful increase in future brokerage movement.

The finding makes sense in hindsight. A canceled listing is still evidence that an agent secured a listing in the first place. It reflects business activity, even if the outcome was unsuccessful. The greater risk is not failure, it’s inactivity.

The agents most likely to leave are not those whose deals are falling apart. They are the ones who have stopped generating opportunities altogether.

Silence, not failure, is the departure signal.

Who moves: The career clock

Pipeline state tells you when the window opens. Tenure tells you who tends to be standing near it.

Experience follows a different pattern than pipeline.

First-year agents are the most likely to change brokerages, switching at a rate 63% above the market average. Movement then declines steadily with each additional year in the business until approximately year five, when it rises sharply before resuming its downward trend. By year ten, agents are roughly 40% less likely than average to switch.

image

The year-five increase stands out because it interrupts an otherwise consistent decline. Something changes at that point in an agent’s career.

By year five, these are no longer new licensees experimenting with the business. They have survived the industry’s highest attrition years, built meaningful production, and established a client base. Yet they become measurably more likely to reconsider their brokerage relationship than the surrounding experience cohorts.

Whatever drives that reassessment, it represents an important retention window. Brokerages that focus exclusively on onboarding new agents may overlook one of the most significant transition points in an established producer’s career.

Headcount and dollars tell different stories

Viewed by headcount, brokerage movement is overwhelmingly a small- and mid-producer phenomenon. Nearly half of all agents who were an agent retention risk and who changed brokerages had produced less than $1 million in the prior twelve months, and more than 85% had produced under $4 million.

Viewed by production volume, however, the picture changes completely.

Agents producing more than $8 million represented just 5% of all movers, yet accounted for approximately 37% of the total production volume that changed brokerages. Agents above $4 million made up only one in seven movers but represented nearly 60% of the production that moved.

Most movers are small. Most moved dollars are not.

The distinction matters because recruiting strategies often optimize for only one of those realities. Focusing exclusively on volume means competing for the same small pool of established producers everyone else is pursuing. Focusing exclusively on headcount captures plenty of movement, but relatively little production.

The more effective approach is to optimize for timing. A productive agent whose pipeline has gone quiet represents both meaningful opportunity and elevated switching risk. The production tier determines the size of the opportunity. The pipeline determines when it is most likely to move.

Putting the findings to work

Most brokerages approach recruiting and retention as periodic activities: quarterly recruiting initiatives, annual performance reviews, occasional coaching conversations. Implicitly, that assumes an agent’s likelihood of moving is relatively stable between those moments. The data suggests otherwise. Switching risk changes as an agent’s business changes, creating windows that can open and close within weeks.

The answer isn’t more hustle. It’s watching the right signals continuously:

For retention

Monitor your own roster for producers whose pipelines have gone quiet. An agent with no recent closing and no active listings is not simply having a slow quarter. They occupy one of the highest observed movement-risk profiles in the dataset.

For recruiting

Apply the same framework across the broader market. The highest-value recruiting opportunities are often not the loudest or most visible agents, but productive agents whose pipelines have recently emptied.

For leadership

Use data to augment agent retention risk and judgment rather than replace it. Experienced brokerage leaders often recognize subtle behavioral changes before they can explain them. Objective market signals make those observations consistent, measurable, and scalable.

The takeaway

Each year, brokerages can expect roughly 20% to 25% of their production volume to leave with departing agents. For decades, movement has largely been treated as an unavoidable consequence of the business.

This analysis suggests otherwise.

Across more than 625,000 producing agents, brokerage movement consistently followed observable patterns. An emptying pipeline increased switching risk. Career stage influenced when agents reconsidered their brokerage relationships. Contrary to conventional wisdom, inactivity proved to be a stronger signal than failed listings.

None of these indicators requires surveys, interviews, or speculation. They already exist in the production data brokerages collect every day.

The firms that consistently retain their best producers, and recruit the right ones from competitors, will not necessarily be those making the most calls. They will be the firms that recognize opportunity before everyone else does.

In brokerage recruiting and retention, timing is not a tactical advantage.

It is the advantage.

Methodology: Analysis of MLS records covering 625,000+ agents and across 32+ MLSs, conducted by Maverick Systems. The cohort includes every agent who closed at least one transaction in the twelve months before a fixed anchor date. Pipeline state (active listings, closing recency), tenure, and production were measured at the anchor; brokerage changes were observed over the following twelve months among agents who continued producing. Tenure movement is presented as an index (average producing agent = 100); production movement as shares of all switchers. Cancellation analysis uses listing status-change timestamps in the markets that report them. Tenure is measured from an agent’s first observable closing.

Diana Zaya is the founder and CEO of Maverick Systems, a real estate analytics company focused on brokerage recruiting, retention, and market intelligence.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the author of this story:
Diana Zaya at diana@mavericksystems.com

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Tracey Velt at tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Let me say something that I think a lot of real estate professionals need to hear right now. When your listing is stalled and sits on the market, it is not automatically your fault.

I know the feeling. The home isn’t moving, the seller is getting anxious, and somewhere in the back of your mind a little voice starts whispering that you must be doing something wrong. That voice is common. It is also, in most cases, lying to you, and when you believe it, you actually become less effective for your client.

So, let’s clear something up.

What you control and what you don’t

Here’s the honest breakdown. You own the marketing. You own the quality and reach of the exposure. You own the negotiation and the communication. Those are yours completely.

What you do not control? The list price. That belongs to the seller. And the broader market conditions. Those belong to nobody.

Think about it this way. No amount of hustle on your part is going to force a buyer to pay more than the market will support. That’s just not how markets work. What the market does reward is visibility, access and activity. Your job is to manufacture maximum exposure so that every qualified buyer in that price range knows the home exists. Exposure drives showings. Showings drive demand. Demand supports price.

You are an exposure manager. That’s the job.

Before you talk price, audit your marketing

Here’s something I see agents skip, and it costs them. Before you have any conversation about a price adjustment, sit down and honestly document everything you’ve done.

Every open house. Every broker tour. Every ad, social post, email and mailer. Don’t forget the exposure that keeps running in the background every single day like the MLS feed, the portal syndication, the buyers searching right now across dozens of websites. That’s ongoing, compounding marketing that most agents forget to even count.

Then pull the comps. Look at days-on-market and price adjustment data for similar active and sold listings in your market. Here’s the thing a lot of sellers don’t realize, and honestly, a lot of agents forget too, the pandemic market is over.

In most markets, homes don’t sell in three days anymore. A listing that feels stalled might actually be performing completely normally against today’s benchmarks. The data is your evidence, and you need it in your hands before you walk into that conversation.

Present the marketing audit first, on its own, so the seller can see the full picture of what’s been done. Then, and only then, introduce the market data and talk about the one lever the seller controls: the price.

The problem usually starts at the listing appointment

I want to be honest with you about where most of this stress actually comes from. It doesn’t start when the home fails to sell. It starts weeks earlier, at the listing appointment, when expectations got set.

If you let a seller anchor on an aggressive timeline or an optimistic price because you wanted to win the listing, you essentially pre-loaded that disappointment. The anxiety you’re managing now? It was created then.

Sellers’ expectations are often still living in the pandemic era that included bidding wars, offers in 48 hours, and waived contingencies. When reality doesn’t match that memory, someone gets blamed. And if you didn’t actively recalibrate those expectations with current data at the start, that someone is going to be you.

Setting realistic expectations upfront isn’t just good customer service. It’s how you protect yourself and your client from a crisis that didn’t have to happen.

Document everything — not just for the conversation, but for protection

Here’s another reason to keep that marketing log: it’s your record. In a market where consumers are scrutinizing the value agents provide, a detailed, ongoing account of your marketing activity is the clearest possible proof that you showed up and did the work. It shows that every variable you controlled was managed well — and that any gap in the outcome traces back to factors outside your hands.

This isn’t defensive. This is professional. The agent who documents consistently, resets expectations early, and separates the marketing audit from the price discussion isn’t scrambling to explain a slow listing. They’re running a system. And systems are what separate the agents who thrive in tough markets from the ones who burn out.

Care deeply — but don’t lose your judgment

There’s a reason doctors and attorneys are trained to pair genuine care with a certain clinical detachment. Emotion shows your commitment. But unmanaged emotion clouds your judgment, and a listing agent spiraling in guilt can’t think clearly enough to actually diagnose what’s happening and help their client.

You can care deeply about your seller’s outcome and still assess the situation with clear eyes. In fact, that’s exactly what they need from you.

If you’ve done everything right — maximized the exposure, documented the work, benchmarked against the real market — and the home still hasn’t sold, then the remaining levers are price and market conditions. Both of those sit outside your control and inside your seller’s reality. That’s not failure. That’s an accurate read of the situation.

And an accurate read, delivered with honesty and confidence, is the most valuable thing you can give an anxious client.

Darryl Davis, CSP, is a real estate coach, speaker, and bestselling author with more than 40 years in the industry. Through his POWER AGENT® Coaching Program, he helps real estate professionals build careers and lives worth smiling about. Learn more at DarrylSpeaks.com.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

In too many American communities, residential development is now shaped less by market need than by attendance at local meetings.

In land-use discussions, debates, and decision-making, power often goes to those who show up, organize early, speak loudly, and have the time to sit through a Tuesday night public hearing. That gives a small group of existing residents outsized power to delay, shrink or kill projects that would add badly needed housing supply.

The result is a system with too many ways to say “no” and far too few ways to say “yes,” even in markets where job growth, household formation, and population growth make new homes necessary.

Homebuilders do not pick sites by public consensus

Homebuilders do not decide where to build by asking a room of neighbors what they would prefer. If they did, America would still be waiting on half its subdivisions.

Every community wants the same impossible menu: affordability, great schools, parks, trails, low taxes, low traffic, large lots, short commutes, privacy, convenient retail, and no change next door. That is not a land-use plan. That is a Santa letter.

Builders make decisions by studying demand, supply, jobs, roads, schools, utilities, absorption, household income, competitive product, lot costs, municipal attitude, capital risk, and timing. They listen to the market because the market is where buyers reveal what they will actually do, not just what they say from a podium.

That does not mean neighbors should be ignored. It means public input should inform judgment, not replace it.

The loudest voice does not always speak in the public interest

In housing debates, organized opposition often claims to represent “the neighborhood.” Sometimes it does. Often, it represents a narrower slice of existing homeowners who have already benefited from past growth and now want to pull the ladder up behind them.

They show up at city hall. They organize petitions. They cite neighborhood character, traffic, trees, schools, safety, drainage, density and quality of life. Some of those concerns are valid. Infrastructure matters. Roads matter. Schools matter. Water, sewer, drainage, fire access, and design all matter.

But the public interest extends beyond those who can attend a public hearing. The people most affected by housing scarcity are usually not in the room: first-time buyers, renters trying to become owners, teachers, nurses, firefighters, police officers, restaurant managers, construction workers and young families priced out before they ever get a chance to speak.

Future residents have no standing because their homes do not exist yet.

That is the structural flaw. Community input too easily becomes an incumbent’s veto power.

DFW is a case study in “no” winning by default

Dallas-Fort Worth does not have the luxury of pretending growth is optional. The region needs tens of thousands of additional homes, yet local hearings often devolve into a familiar ritual: preserve everything exactly as it is, oppose changes to lot size or product type, and demand affordability without allowing the housing forms that make it possible.

Recent debates over comprehensive planning, minimum lot sizes, duplexes, townhomes, smaller lots and “missing middle” housing show how quickly a conversation about growth can turn into a fight over whether the map should ever change.

That is a problem.

A region cannot add jobs, attract headquarters, and celebrate population growth, then act shocked when people need somewhere to live. That is not planning. That is inviting everyone to the barbecue and hiding the chairs.

If builders and developers can only build where every nearby resident agrees, supply stalls. When supply stalls, prices rise. When prices rise, the same communities that say they support teachers, first responders and young families quietly become unaffordable to them.

Public process should inform decisions, not paralyze them

Local governments have a hard job. They must weigh neighborhood feedback against housing shortages, price pressure, infrastructure capacity, private property rights, tax base, long-term growth and community character.

That balancing act should protect communities from reckless development. Bad projects should die. Weak plans should improve. Infrastructure should be addressed. Design should matter. Drainage, roads, schools, water and sewer are not details; they are the foundation.

But the process also has to leave room for responsible projects.

Texas has begun giving cities more tools to address housing supply, including greater flexibility on lot sizes, underused commercial sites, and housing types ranging from detached single-family to large multifamily. Those tools only matter if local leaders are willing to use them.

Otherwise, reform becomes theater. The state changes the rules, the city praises the housing supply, and the first organized neighborhood group still gets to choke out the project.

That is not leadership. That is an outsourcing policy to whoever brings the most matching yard signs.

The market is clear, even when City Hall hearings are not

Builders do not ignore buyers. Buyers are the market. But builders also understand something that public hearings often obscure: preferences conflict.

People say they dislike density, yet they want restaurants, grocery stores, services, and medical offices nearby that require rooftops. They say they hate traffic, yet they want Costco, H-E-B, Home Depot, schools, employers and convenience close to home. They say they want affordability, yet they oppose smaller lots, attached products, townhomes and walkable nodes that can deliver more attainable price points.

You cannot demand Texas growth with California-style approval politics and expect housing to remain affordable.

The market must be interpreted through behavior: deposits, closings, commute patterns, school enrollment, job nodes, retail demand, utility capacity and infrastructure plans. Local leadership should treat community input seriously, but not as a blanket veto.

Not every project deserves approval. But every project should not have to survive a political rodeo where “no” wins by default.

The endgame

In too many places, the practical outcome of land-use politics is simple: organized local opposition outweighs regional housing need.

When projects are withdrawn, rezoning dies and developers redirect capital elsewhere, demand does not disappear. It shows up as longer commutes, higher rents, higher home prices and fewer options for households that do not already own in the “right” ZIP code.

You cannot build a city by asking everyone what they want in the abstract. Housing requires trade-offs. It requires math. It requires leadership willing to say that future residents matter, too. Right now, too many communities have built a system optimized for “no.”

And then they wonder why the next generation cannot afford to live there.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Atlantic Home Mortgage announced Tuesday the launch of Lendtrain, a refinance-focused online platform that allows homeowners to compare estimated refinance options in about 30 seconds without submitting a loan application or undergoing a credit check.

The company said the platform is designed to help borrowers determine whether refinancing is worth pursuing before speaking with a loan officer.

Users enter basic information about their existing mortgage and receive an estimated refinance quote that includes wholesale interest rates, estimated closing costs, projected monthly payments and a break-even analysis showing how long it could take to recover refinancing costs through monthly savings.

“Most homeowners do not need a sales call just to find out whether a refinance is worth exploring,” Lendtrain founder Tony Davis said in a statement. “They need a fast, transparent estimate that shows the rate, closing costs, monthly savings and break-even point before they commit.”

Lendtrain focuses exclusively on refinance transactions, including rate-and-term refis, cash-out refis, VA Interest Rate Reduction Refinance Loans (IRRRLs) and jumbo deals.

The platform operates through the mortgage broker channel, allowing borrowers to compare wholesale lender pricing rather than a single lender’s retail offerings. Homeowners who decide to proceed with a refinance are connected with licensed mortgage professionals to complete the loan process.

Davis said the platform is intended to use technology to streamline the early stages of shopping for a refinance while leaving the mortgage origination process to licensed loan professionals.

“The rate gets all the attention, but break-even is usually the real decision,” Davis said. “If refinancing costs thousands of dollars, homeowners need to know how many months of savings it takes to earn that money back.”

Lendtrain is currently available to homeowners in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Utah.

Year to date, Atlantic Home Mortgage has produced a volume of $29.19 million, according to Modex data. For 2025, the Georgia-headquartered company did $130.4 million in volume across 279 units.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

A Brooklyn Heights townhouse sold for $24.5 million in an off-market deal, marking the borough’s most expensive residential deal of the year. The 6,625-square-foot brownstone at 192 Columbia Heights surpassed this year’s record, a penthouse in Dumbo that sold for $16.3 million in March. The transaction ranks as the borough’s third-most expensive residential sale ever, according to the New York Times. Just two Brooklyn properties have ever fetched higher prices: a 10,000-square-foot mansion in Gravesend that sold for $32 million in 2025 and a four-story home in Brooklyn Heights that sold for $25.5 million in 2021.

Despite a decline in the number of sales across the city, prices have continued to rise. Manhattan’s median sale price reached $1.3 million during the second quarter, while Brooklyn’s climbed to $1.05 million, even as the number of closed sales dropped 29.2 percent year over year in Manhattan and 31.5 percent in Brooklyn, according to the Times.

Ravi Kantha of SERHANT., who represented the seller, said the sale reflects the growing appeal of real estate in Brooklyn Heights.

“The market in Brooklyn Heights used to be a value alternative for buyers who wanted more space than they could find in the city,” Kantha said. “It’s now a direct competitor to the Village and Upper East Side for some of New York City’s wealthiest people.”

The home’s previous owners, Granite Broadcasting CEO W. Don Cornwell and his wife, Sandra, who purchased the property in 1996, listed it for $16 million in 2014, which would have set a new sales record at the time. The home sold four years later for just under $12 million, according to The Real Deal.

Constructed in 1856, the 25-foot-wide mansion recently underwent a comprehensive renovation led by Belgian architect and designer Nicolas Schuybroek. Spanning seven bedrooms, the residence has been updated for the 21st century while retaining much of its historic charm.

A stunning entry foyer leads to a parlor floor with 14-foot ceilings, a spacious living room with a wood-burning fireplace, and a grand formal dining room with floor-to-ceiling doors opening onto a deck with sweeping harbor views, as 6sqft previously reported.

The expansive eat-in chef’s kitchen introduces a modern touch to the home’s historic aesthetic, while an operable dumbwaiter connecting to the parlor level nods to the residence’s historic roots.

The primary bedroom features its own fireplace and a sitting room larger than many living rooms across the five boroughs. Additional highlights include a library, two office spaces, and a top-floor gym.

RELATED:

The post Brooklyn Heights townhouse sells for $24.5M, the borough’s priciest sale of 2026 first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Rocket Pro is doubling down on speed, pricing and technology with its July “Power Play” initiative, extending broker pricing incentives while introducing same-day conditional approvals and a clear-to-close commitment period of 12 business days for conventional purchase loans.

The company’s July Power Play offerings include faster loan processing, continued pricing incentives and broker-driven technology development. Rocket Pro will offer same-business-day conditional approvals; a 12-business-day clear-to-close commitment on eligible conventional purchase loans; continued purchase and Compass pricing incentives; and the next phase of its “Big Pitch” technology competition.

July marks the fourth month of the initiative. In an interview with HousingWire ahead of the announcement, Austin Niemiec, chief revenue officer of Rocket Mortgage, said that mortgage brokers no longer need to choose between competitive pricing, operational speed and technology.

“For years, brokers have had to choose between speed, pricing or technology when choosing a lender,” Niemiec said. “We believe it’s our job to deliver all three all at once.”

As part of that delivery, Rocket Pro will commit to issuing conditional approvals on the same business day and clearing eligible conventional purchase loans to close within 12 business days.

Faster approvals and closings will provide benefits beyond operational efficiency by helping brokers strengthen relationships with borrowers and real estate agents.

“When brokers can get an approval the same day they send us documents, that’s going to wow agents and clients,” Niemiec said. “It also frees up time for our broker partners to focus on going and winning new business.”

Brokers whose qualifying loans miss these service commitments will be eligible for a $1,000 lender credit. But Niemiec said the company is confident it can stand behind the guarantees since the turnaround times largely reflect Rocket Pro’s existing performance.

“We’re just putting our money where our mouth is because we’re so confident in it,” he said. “Quality and speed are the name of the game, and we’re delivering both.”

The commitments apply to conventional purchase loans, although Niemiec said the company believes it delivers industry-leading turn times across its broader product lineup, including more complex loan types.

Extended credits through Aug. 3

On the pricing front, Rocket Pro is yet again extending its 60-basis-point purchase credit and a 40-basis-point Compass credit as part of its partnership with the real estate brokerage. Niemiec said the extension runs through Aug. 3.

Rocket Pro said broker partners can qualify for the full 100-basis-point credit when assisting clients who are working with agents affiliated with participating real estate brands, including @properties, Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate, CENTURY 21, Christie’s International Real Estate, Coldwell Banker, Compass, Corcoran, ERA and Sotheby’s International Realty.

Niemiec said broker demand and relationship-building opportunities drove the decision to continue the program beyond its original expiration.

“We keep extending it because brokers love it,” he said. “The new relationships that our Rocket Pro partners are creating with the hundreds of thousands of Compass agents out there is what’s most encouraging.”

While the pricing incentives have boosted loan production, Niemiec said they are also helping brokers establish long-term referral relationships that extend beyond the current homebuying season.

‘Big Pitch’ tech finalists announced

The July Power Play also advances Rocket Pro’s “Big Pitch” technology competition, which invited brokers nationwide to submit ideas for new technology tools.

Niemiec said the company received more than 350 submissions, including many from brokers who are not currently Rocket Pro partners. The three finalists will work directly with Rocket Pro’s product and technology teams to further develop their ideas.

The finalists include George Jules of Clearview Lending Solutions, whose proposal falls under the “cut time, not corners” category and aligns with Rocket Pro’s promise of combining human expertise with AI-driven speed. Seth Hasan of West Capital Lending submitted a “compete when it counts” concept focused on helping brokers better serve their clients. And Andrew Haff of Barren Hill Mortgage has a “save more deals” proposal to support Rocket Pro’s goal of helping more borrowers achieve homeownership.

Additional details and public voting are expected to launch in a few weeks, Niemiec confirmed, with finalists presenting their concepts live at Rocket Pro’s RPX event in September. The winning submission will receive a $100,000 grand prize.

Niemiec said the company also saw strong adoption of its temporary cash-out refinance pricing incentive introduced during June’s Power Play campaign, which aimed to help brokers remain competitive despite elevated mortgage rates.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Better Mortgage has agreed to pay $7.185 million to settle a nearly six-year-long lawsuit, which alleges the company failed to pay overtime to mortgage underwriters it classified as exempt employees, according to court filings seeking preliminary approval of the agreement.

The proposed settlement, filed July 1, would resolve claims brought by 211 current and former underwriters who joined the federal lawsuit, along with related claims under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) covering 116 employees. Workers whose claims were previously sent to arbitration are not included in the settlement, nor does the agreement cover a broader class of employees.

The lawsuit was filed in September 2020 by former underwriter Lorenzo Dominguez. It accused Better of misclassifying “underwriting employees as exempt from the overtime requirements of state and federal law, thereby failing to pay them proper wages when they worked overtime.”

The case stretched on for nearly six years, including hearings with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and three unsuccessful mediation attempts.

According to the filing, much of the litigation centered on arbitration agreements, a retention bonus agreement that offered $10,000 to employees who remain employed for six months, and release agreements that Better rolled out after the lawsuit was filed. This prompted disputes over whether employees could continue pursuing their claims in court.

Under the proposed settlement, Better will pay a non-reversionary settlement of $7.185 million while separately covering payroll taxes and settlement administration costs.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys plan to seek about one-third of the settlement fund — or roughly $2.37 million — in fees, along with up to $70,000 in litigation costs and a $12,500 service award for the lead plaintiff. The fees and awards are subject to court approval.

The agreement also sets aside $357,750 to resolve claims under PAGA. Under state law, 75% of that amount would go to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency, with the remaining 25% distributed to eligible employees.

After deducting attorneys fees, costs and other court-approved payments, about $3.9 million would be distributed among participating workers. That amount is in addition to $485,000 previously paid by Better to employees who signed release agreements.

Individual payouts will be based largely on the number of weeks employees worked as underwriters, with California workers receiving larger allocations because they are releasing additional state law claims. No participating employee would receive less than $1,000, according to the settlement.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys estimate the remaining claims are worth nearly $13.9 million, including unpaid overtime and California labor code penalties, making the gross settlement worth about 52% of their estimated damages.

Better denied any wrongdoing and said it complied with federal and California wage-and-hour laws. The company agreed to settle to avoid the cost, uncertainty and time associated with continued litigation and potential appeals, according to the filing.

In a statement given to HousingWire, a Better spokesperson said, “As a matter of policy, we do not comment publicly on settlements. We remain committed to maintaining a fair and respectful workplace for all employees.”

Better is expected to fund the settlement fund by Jan. 8, 2027, or 10 business days after the settlement effective date, legal documents said.

A hearing on preliminary approval of the settlement is scheduled for Aug. 11 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The fight between Compass, the country’s largest brokerage, and Zillow, its largest listing portal, has been covered as a corporate turf war — dueling lawsuits, a judge in Chicago ordering tens of thousands of listings restored, executives trading accusations. A two-day federal hearing wrapped in Chicago on July 2, with post-hearing briefs due July 9 and a ruling to follow. That framing is comfortable, and it misses what is actually at stake: the integrity of the data the mortgage system uses to price homes and the loans against them.

Here is the part the turf-war coverage skips

When a home is appraised, the value isn’t conjured; it’s triangulated from recent comparable sales, drawn overwhelmingly from the Multiple Listing Service — the shared database brokers maintain that feeds the public search sites. Lenders underwrite against that appraisal.

Government-backed entities buy and securitize the mortgages. The automated valuation models behind Zillow’s “Zestimate” and the banks’ own risk systems train on the same transactions. The entire collateral chain assumes one thing — that the record of what sold, when and for how much is reasonably complete and honest.

Compass wants to change that record’s completeness. The firm’s strategy is to market homes privately first — to its own agents and clients, then on its own website — and release them to the shared database only later, if ever. Market a home privately for weeks, test and cut the price out of public view, then enter it into the record scrubbed of that history, and you haven’t merely hidden a listing.

A home first offered at $900,000, cut twice, and sold at $825,000 tells a very different story than the same house appearing only as a clean $825,000 sale. The first signals softening demand; the second erases it. Appraise the next house on the block off that clean number, and you’ll set it too high — and so will every model that learns from it.

Days on market is the housing market’s odometer

There is a plainer name for this. Days on market is the number a buyer reads to judge how hard a listing has been driven and how motivated the seller has become — and the private phase quietly winds it back to zero. Congress made turning back a car’s odometer a federal crime in 1972 because the mileage is a material fact buyers rely on. The housing version carries no such penalty. It carries a friendlier name.

Why push the market this way? Follow the economics. Compass has never posted a full year of profit since its 2021 IPO. In a thin-margin business, the asset worth controlling is inventory and the data around it. And the firm’s own internal materials, cited in Zillow’s antitrust complaint, indicate its private listings end with Compass representing both buyer and seller — keeping the full commission rather than splitting it — about 72% more often than listings taken straight to the open market (roughly 31% of off-market sales versus 18%).

For the record, Compass says it doesn’t encourage double-ending. None of this is illegal. It is simply a structural reason a brokerage might prefer the private path, whatever the net to the seller.

And this is not an outsider’s theory. The MLS now at the center of the Chicago case — Midwest Real Estate Data — warned of exactly these harms in its own 2019 white paper, cautioning that homes held off the MLS leave “incomplete historical records that limit appraisals, CMAs and county assessor valuations,” before it partnered with Compass to take the private model national. The firm now selling the private path once documented the damage it does to the record you price against.

This was never really about one seller’s choice

A homeowner who markets privately may do fine, and privacy is a legitimate aim — a celebrity, a judge, a domestic-violence survivor may reasonably want it. The question is not whether private listings should exist; it is what happens to price discovery when they stop being the exception and become a mainstream strategy.

One home off the books is a choice. A meaningful share of the market off the books degrades the shared record for everyone — including the buyers, appraisers, lenders and investors who never opted in.

This is where the corporate story becomes a credit story. In an analysis last October, investment banker Teresa Grobecker modeled the effect of routing roughly a fifth of listings off the MLS: the direct hit to home prices looks modest, but appraisal variance widens and credit tightens through the mortgage market, where the near-term danger is a lending freeze rather than a price crash.

Thin, noisy comparable sales raise repurchase and model risk for lenders; that drives underwriting overlays, wider secondary-market spreads and slower closings. The price effect is the part everyone debates. The financing-plumbing effect is the part that has gone almost unexamined — and it is the one that should worry banks and their regulators.

It helps to remember what the shared record replaced

Before it, housing resembled a car lot, where the dealer knew cost and comparable sales while most customers didn’t, and price was less discovered than extracted. The MLS pulled American housing toward something closer to a transparent exchange — everyone seeing the same data, any agent able to sell any firm’s listing. Walling off inventory runs that backward, handing the advantage to whoever controls the listings.

None of this makes Zillow a disinterested party; it is a powerful company defending a business built on open access to listings. Nor is it the only one now sounding the alarm: On July 1, the Consumer Federation of America petitioned the FTC and the Department of Justice to investigate these MLS partnerships, warning they “increase steering incentives” and let a firm “make money on both ends of the transaction.”

But on this question the public interest and the soundness of the lending system align. A complete, honest record of what homes sell for is infrastructure — closer to a stock exchange’s trade tape than to any one company’s product.

Regulators and bank supervisors have spent years worrying about opacity in markets far less central to household wealth than this one. They should look past the corporate fight to the thing it obscures: the data the mortgage system quietly depends on is being privatized, one listing at a time.

Bruce Ailion is an Atlanta real estate broker and attorney with a master’s degree in real estate. He competes with Compass and other firms that advocate privately marketed listings.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Kelley Blue Book, a name synonymous with trusted automobile valuations, is the latest non-traditional player looking to make some waves in the real estate space. 

Kelley Blue Book Homes has launched a residential real estate platform that offers homeowners free, data-driven home valuations and gives real estate agents subscription-based access to seller leads, the company announced Tuesday. The platform is a joint venture between valuation and appraisal technology firm True Footage and Kelley Blue Book parent company Cox Enterprises. In April, True Footage raised a $40 million Series C round led by Cox Enterprises’ Socium Ventures.

“Through True Footage, over the last few years, we have been providing appraisal technology to a lot of the nation’s top appraisers. We have great analytics and tools like TrueTracts that can produce highly accurate and comprehensive valuations,” John Liss, the CEO of True Footage, who is also leading the charge at Kelley Blue Book Homes, said. “We wanted to get our products in front of consumers because the options available to them are not that accurate and may have different incentives to price a property a certain way.” 

Initial launch in 10 states

The service, now open for consumers to use and agents to sign-up for in 10 states, applies the Kelley Blue Book brand’s pricing authority from the auto sector to housing. Seller marketing services and lead distribution are scheduled to begin Aug. 1, according to the announcement.

The platform is live for agents and consumers in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, North Carolina, Nevada, Oregon, Texas, Utah and Washington. Agents can purchase marketing rights on a ZIP code basis and receive access to homeowners who request valuation reports in those areas.

But not just any agent can sign up, Liss said he and his team have a stringent screening process for agents, where they examine agents’ closed sales volume, average days on market, sale-to-list price ratio and things like their sales process and follow-up process with clients. 

“This is not just a sign up and pay type of situation,” Liss said. “We are really looking to find the best agents, and we are built on the premise that for every property there is an agent that has the best strategy to sell it. We don’t think you should hire the person that has been badgering you at the PTA meetings for the past decade, you should hire the top person based on the data in your market, and we want to make sure [that] we pair consumers with the best valuation experience and expertise, but also with the right strategy to maximize their outcome.” 

Liss added that this subscription model structure was created in response to both agent and consumer concerns with the more common success fee or commission referral fee models. 

“What we have seen is that success fees have become extremely extractive and especially top performing agents, who we are targeting, are tired of paying these exorbitant success fees,” Liss said. 

He added that agents are also not under any pressure to attach ancillary services like mortgage, homeowners insurance or title insurance to their seller leads. 

All about the consumer experience

Prospective sellers looking for a valuation on their home can input data about the property into Kelley Blue Book Homes to receive a valuation report, where they are also asked if they would like to be contacted by an agent. Regardless of their response, the report comes branded with a designated Kelley Blue Book agent’s information, who is listed as their designated Kelley Blue Book advisor, providing them with the information in case they have questions or decide to explore listing their property. Liss said that one agent will remain connected with the property and that Kelley Blue Book Homes does not send the prospective seller to several agents, which only causes confusion and annoyance on the part of the consumer. 

In early test markets, more than 17% of homes that received a Kelley Blue Book Homes price report were listed on the MLS within 90 days, according to the announcement.

“This is about as high-intent as it gets for agents,” Liss said. 

Liss believes this is a product of the quality of the firm’s valuation engine which incorporates things like neighborhood-level pricing trends, property-specific renovations and condition details supplied by the homeowner, micro-market dynamics and seasonal timing considerations. 

“Our data can break things down by neighborhood and then take things further by looking at trends for specific property types in a neighborhood because what is going on there with 5,000 square foot homes might not be the same as what is happening with 1,000 square foot homes,” Liss said. “Or if a consumer reaches out to an advisor wondering if putting in a pool would be a good investment, we can show them what the return on their investment would be in their neighborhood based on the data.” 

While the platform is more geared towards sellers, Liss said they have seen many buyers use the platform to an offer price on a property they are considering. 

The right time for the right company

Despite the current chaos of lawsuits, listing data ownership debates and consolidation taking over the housing industry, Liss said he believes this is the right time to launch Kelley Blue Book Homes. 

“I think it is a really good time for a brand that is focused on the truth and providing people with the best information possible to get into the industry,” he said. “A lot of people are fighting right now and that creates an environment of low consumer trust because people feel like the companies maybe are working for themselves and not for the consumer. A lot of people are trying to say they are all about consumers, but we are this unbiased party in the conversation, just focusing on providing people with the best information.” 

Although the platform is currently only available in 10 states, Liss said they plan to add another 10 states in the fall, with an aim of going nationwide sometime during Q1 2027. 

“It is going to be a fast and aggressive rollout, but we have already presold hundreds of spots to agents,” he said. “The response so far has been pretty positive, which I think is a combination of seller leads being the Holy Grail and people just being tired of existing options, combined with a strong affinity for the Kelley Blue Book brand.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

North Texas Real Estate Information Systems, Inc. (NTREIS) has launched NTREIS Rewards, a new incentive program that returns a portion of MLS-generated revenue directly to broker participants based on their listing activity and data contributions, according to an announcement on Tuesday. 

The Texas- and Louisiana-based MLS said this broker rewards initiative marks a strategic shift, placing broker participants at the center of its financial model.

In its inaugural year, NTREIS has self-funded a seven-figure payout that will be distributed to qualifying brokers in July 2026, the company said. The program is funded internally, with no outside data deals or brokerage partnerships attached.

NTREIS serves more than 53,000 subscribers across 44 counties in Texas and Louisiana. As MLSs nationally face pressure over data control, compensation rules and the value of participation, NTREIS is positioning this program as a direct financial return to the brokers whose listings power that ecosystem.

How NTREIS Rewards works

The initial rewards cycle is based on broker listing activity within the NTREIS compilation during the 2025 calendar year. Evaluation criteria include the number of listings entered into the MLS, the richness and completeness of content contributed to the MLS and the successful movement of listings to sold and closed status.

Future reward cycles are expected to add compliance performance to those metrics once NTREIS assumes full compliance responsibility at the end of 2026.

Consistent with state licensing laws and MLS participation agreements, payments are made only to MLS participants — licensed brokers who contribute and hold ownership of listing content entered into NTREIS. Individual real estate agents operating under a broker’s license are not direct recipients of distributions.

“Brokers are the purpose behind the MLS and its primary content provider,” NTREIS CEO Chris Carrillo said in the announcement. “The listings they input fuel the marketplace, provide transparency for buyers and sellers, and drive fair housing. NTREIS Rewards puts that value back where it belongs. Broker participants should be the focal point of everything we do going forward, and this program is a tangible expression of that commitment.”

Broker choice and syndication

The program also recognizes brokers that opted into external data syndication, sending their listings from the MLS to third-party digital platforms. NTREIS framed this as an affirmation of broker data choice rather than a move toward exclusive arrangements with single partners.

“As a broker, I know firsthand how much work goes into building a quality listing and getting it to market,” said Tammy Kister, broker and chair of the NTREIS board of directors. “NTREIS Rewards is the board’s way of saying we see that work, and we believe the brokers who contribute to this marketplace deserve to share in the value they help create.”

Qualifying brokers will be contacted directly with instructions on how to register, submit required documentation and receive rewards electronically, the company said.

“We built this program to be straightforward and fair,” said René Galicia, executive vice president and general counsel of NTREIS. “Brokers who contributed quality data to the marketplace should see that recognized, not as a courtesy, but as a matter of principle.”

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

America’s housing affordability crisis has reached a breaking point. Home prices remain out of reach for millions of families, apartment rents continue to climb and the dream of homeownership is slipping further away for first-time buyers, working families, seniors and young Americans.

Manufactured housing should be one of the nation’s most effective answers to this crisis.

Instead, Congress is on the verge of passing housing legislation that misses the mark for the very consumers who depend most on manufactured housing as the nation’s premier source of affordable, non-subsidized homeownership.

The pending housing legislation contains worthwhile provisions, but it largely ignores the three structural barriers that have suppressed the manufactured housing industry for decades.

Manufactured housing affordability runs into three roadblocks

First, Congress fails to address exclusionary zoning that continues to keep HUD Code manufactured homes out of thousands of communities. More than twenty-five years after Congress strengthened federal preemption under the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000, too many local jurisdictions simply ignore the law. Unless Congress reinforces HUD’s responsibility to enforce enhanced federal preemption, millions of Americans will continue to be denied access to the nation’s most affordable form of homeownership.

Second, the legislation fails to fully implement the “Duty to Serve” mandate enacted by Congress nearly two decades ago. Approximately 70% of manufactured home purchasers rely on personal property (chattel) financing, yet Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac continue to provide little meaningful support for this market. Without competitive financing, families pay more, qualify less often and lose opportunities for homeownership.

Third, Congress leaves the industry vulnerable to costly Department of Energy manufactured housing standards that could substantially increase the price of entry-level homes. Every unnecessary regulatory cost imposed on manufactured housing ultimately falls on consumers who can least afford it.

These are not abstract policy debates. They directly affect whether a young family can purchase its first home, whether a senior can afford to age in place, or whether a working household can escape the cycle of rising rents. Unfortunately, the legislation also reflects a broader concern within the manufactured housing industry itself.

Manufactured housing must stay centered on modest-income buyers

Rather than focusing on the mainstream HUD Code homes that have historically provided affordable homeownership to millions of Americans, recent legislative priorities have increasingly emphasized higher-cost products and market segments. While innovation is important, policymakers should never lose sight of the industry’s core mission: providing quality, affordable homes for families of modest means.

Manufactured housing should not become another niche housing product. Its greatest strength has always been delivering homeownership at a price point that conventional site-built housing simply cannot match.

Congress still has time to improve this legislation. Strengthening federal preemption, ensuring full implementation of Duty to Serve for chattel lending and protecting consumers from unnecessary regulatory costs would do far more to expand affordable homeownership than many of the provisions currently under consideration.

A path to stronger access and lower costs for manufactured housing

At a time when elected officials from both parties agree that America faces an affordable housing crisis, manufactured housing should be at the center—not the margins—of the solution.

If Congress truly wants to make homeownership more attainable, it must focus on the barriers that prevent affordable manufactured housing from reaching the families who need it most. That is the opportunity before us. It should not be missed.

Mark Weiss, CEO & President at Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Artificial intelligence has reached homebuilding’s proving ground. Not the proving ground for a demo or a pitch deck, nor the conference-stage jumbo-screen promise that technology will transform an industry whose complexity has humbled generations of would-be transformers.

It’s the real sniff test. AI’s proving ground has become the homebuilding business itself.

It is land acquired or passed over. A plan selected for a site. A wall moved two feet. An option added to a home because someone believes a buyer will value it enough to pay for it. A material quantity calculated correctly or incorrectly. A purchasing decision made against today’s cost rather than last month’s. A sales counselor looking a customer in the eye and making a promise about the home the family expects to live in.

This is where artificial intelligence, generative design, automation and the rapidly expanding field of applied AI solutions for residential construction are undergoing a trial by fire. The industry itself has become an enormous, real-time discovery and learning lab.

Homebuilders are not merely testing AI.

AI is testing homebuilding’s systems, assumptions, handoffs, product strategies, data, operating models and decision processes. It is peeling back where information arrives late or missing key data points, where the same work gets done repeatedly, where people compensate for disconnected systems, and where builders continue to spend money designing and constructing things customers do not value enough to pay for.

AI has begun to reveal differences in operating capabilities between organizations whose discovery processes are accelerated and those whose ability to learn and adapt is weighed down by delayed or missing operational and market feedback.

That is the larger context for Higharc’s announcement that it has raised a $95 million Series C led by global software investor Insight Partners, bringing its total funding to more than $170 million, and simultaneously reached an agreement with US LBM to extend its AI estimating platform into the building-materials supply chain.

The money is substantial, commensurate with investments and commitments in AI power across sectors right now. The continued expansion beyond homebuilding operators into the lumber and building materials distribution channel may be more so.

The Missouri “Show-me” state question homebuilding business leader ask is the one that will determine the fate of every AI claim now competing for their attention and capital resources:

Can people trust it?

Trust is the actual product

Homebuilding has always run on two forms of intelligence that are difficult to automate.

One is ground-level common sense. The other is the understanding that passes between two or more pairs of human eyes when people believe a business deal’s promise extends beyond the black-and-white terms on a piece of paper.

A buyer signs an agreement to purchase a house. Yet the currency of the transaction depends on something larger: the buyer’s belief that the builder means to deliver not merely the technical scope of the contract, but the full value of the promise. Livability. Memories. Sanctuary. Home.

Business leaders make technology investments on similar terms.

A software agreement can specify features, integrations, implementation schedules and service levels. It cannot, by itself, persuade an executive to believe the system will work when a real plan changes, a land opportunity appears unexpectedly, a supplier quote comes in wrong, or a customer wants something the existing process was never designed to accommodate.

If common sense and that eye-to-eye trust are absent from the table, skepticism kicks up. Cynicism follows.

Higharc co-founder and CEO Marc Minor knows that the homebuilding industry has crossed an important threshold in its willingness to talk about AI. Higharc, he said in an exclusive interview with HousingWire TBD, was an AI company before the term became pervasive and commercially useful.

“At Higharc, we’ve built models trained on real home plans. We combine them with rigorous construction logic to ensure outputs are reliable. That’s why our estimating AI and autonomous workflows produce results builders can actually trust. Higharc generates buildings as spatial databases, then uses that data to automate complex homebuilding workflows with confidence.”

That last word – trust – especially now that it has been real-time and place-tested for five-plus years, matters more than the AI label.

A hallucinated sentence can be embarrassing. A hallucinated material quantity, code condition, structural relationship, or construction detail can cost money, delay a start, and propagate errors through estimating, purchasing, permitting and field execution.

Higharc’s wager is that the distinction between impressive AI and useful AI in homebuilding begins with the underlying representation of the home. The company generates homes as structured spatial data that capture geometry, construction standards, and code requirements, then uses that foundation to automate design, estimating, and sales workflows. Its newly announced AutoTranslate capability is intended to convert existing 2D plan images into dynamic 3D data models and produce material quantities aligned with purchasable products.

Still, Minor doesn’t hesitate to set realistic, achievable bounds for the claim.

“Technology is not a panacea. So much comes down to the operating model and the strategy and the reality of land and land use and the economics of it.”

That is where the proving ground begins.

The goal is not more choices

The 2026 housing market leaves builders with razor-thin and time-bound margins for error.

Affordability remains strained. Buyers remain selective. Incentives can bridge some gaps, but they cannot permanently resolve a mismatch between a home’s cost and what a customer believes it is worth. The operational challenge, then, is not simply to build faster.

It is to become more precise, not just on paper, not just in the documentation, and not just on the construction jobsite, but in connecting the entire building lifecycle to more exactly what is in the homebuying customer’s mind and expectations.

Builders need to know which land opportunities can support which homes, at what costs, for which customers. They need to distinguish between features buyers truly value and those they will be loath to fund because of complexity, or because a particular feature or functionality fails the “must-have” test. They need to know when personalization creates willingness to pay and when variability merely creates drafting work, estimating risk, purchasing complexity and field errors.

For years, much of the technology conversation around generative design centered on adding possibilities.

The more consequential use case may be subtraction. Which plan should not be carried forward? Which option creates less customer value than operational friction? Which small variations across divisions, communities and plans consume margin without increasing willingness to pay? Which land parcel should a builder pass on because the product fit is wrong?

Conversely, which floor plan, elevation, or configuration opportunity becomes feasible because a builder can adapt the product fast enough to meet the site, the market, and the customer?

Minor is careful not to suggest that technology can simply generate the perfect house for every production buyer. He sees the most literal form of buyer-driven design emerging first in custom and infill settings. But the underlying principle extends farther.

“It’s really exciting to imagine a world where the buyer is integrated into the design process, and it’s all happening under one roof, where constructability, cost and design quality are all in one conversation. That’s really why we’re in business. Our hope is to integrate those considerations –  design decision-making, cost and constructability – into one.”

That does not mean every buyer gets everything. It means the builder gets closer to knowing what a customer values most and is willing to pay for.

Move the intelligence upstream

Homebuilding absorbs bad decisions slowly and expensively, except when they absorb them very rapidly and even more expensively. A questionable assumption early in the process can become a plan revision, a re-estimate, a rebid, a permit delay, a field question or a change order months later. By then, the cost is no longer the decision itself.

It is everything that the decision has touched, and every other decision that has not been taken. That is why one of the most useful ideas in Minor’s description of Higharc has little to do with artificial intelligence as a standalone technology. It has to do with timing.

“Ultimately, this is about creating intelligence earlier in the process. When you can make decisions much further up the decision chain, and those decisions are informed by a more fulsome context — whether that context is feasibility studies, the option mix that’s going to match demand the best, the most up-to-date view of cost to build, or, even on a more basic level, the correct plans and drawings without errors — the more empowerment and transparency and intelligence across the whole value chain that we can push upstream.”

Where does this logic become strategic? Land.

Historically, Minor said, Higharc has often helped builders react to an unexpected land opportunity by adapting product quickly enough to pursue a site that did not fit the existing plan portfolio. The next frontier moves further up the build-cycle operational stream.

By combining live product data with site information, cost, customer fit and margin profiles, homebuilding business decision-makers can now begin to run feasibility scenarios before commitments harden. Minor sees the opportunity to map the product a builder actually has – not an abstract prototype – against land use and profitability farther upstream.

That does not make AI the land committee. It does accelerate the land committee’s discovery process and adds to the discernment – the “being smarter” part – into how the lots and the product can align with customers’ needs and pocketbooks. That distinction – augmenting capability, instincts, trusted relationships, etc. – may prove crucial to adoption.

“More context for decisions is generally a good thing. I think that’s the primary use case we’ve seen successfully outside of Higharc as well when it comes to AI. It’s this kind of Ironman suit concept, where it’s really more about giving you a lot more context and capability, but you’re still the one empowered to do the work. It’s like a really great assistant.”

The human being making an effort and earning trust in a pair of locked eyes remains in the room. So does accountability.

Why US LBM Matters

The homebuilding value chain is filled with people recreating the same home, in an echo chamber of handoffs. Architects draw it. Estimators interpret it. Suppliers interpret it again. Sales and marketing teams create their own representations. Purchasing teams reconcile specifications and prices. Field teams encounter the physical version.

Every handoff creates another opportunity for one-off interpretation, delay and error.

That makes Higharc’s agreement with US LBM carry more strategic weight than a simple expansion into another customer category.

The new product is designed to allow distributors and dealers to generate material takeoffs from builder plan sets at enterprise scale. A shared- or single-source-of-truth playbook opens the door to reducing friction and learning to get more from finite money, time and human effort.

“As their preferred distributor partners and dealer partners are working from the same data that they’re working from, that ultimately should create a better opportunity for true partnership, where you can work on value engineering. By empowering this sort of better partnership, ultimately we’re improving value not just for the distributor, but for the builder.”

If the builder and distributor can work from a common, trusted representation of the home, estimating becomes the first doable step forward. Value engineering can happen earlier. Material decisions can become more transparent. Supplier knowledge can move upstream.

And the operational parties and partners can spend less time debating whose number is right and more time deciding what creates value.

The test has only begun

Higharc says customers have compressed product development from months or years to weeks or days, cut time to community opening by 25% to 50%, and increased margins by 10% to 15%.

Those claims are consequential to business viability and a business’s ability to prosper. They are also exactly the kind of claims the industry’s real-time proving ground now has to validate, builder by builder, community by community and workflow by workflow. It is the standard every AI company asking homebuilders to alter how they work must meet.

The durable winners in this phase will not be the systems that promise to remove people from decisions. They will be the ones that give people accelerated intelligence, more reliable context, and enough confidence in the underlying information to make better decisions faster.

The customer lens on this proving grounds is no different. Homebuyers do not want artificial intelligence, for by itself, it doesn’t convey value.

They want a home whose location, design, function and price align more closely with what they value. They want less of what they do not value and do not want to pay for. And they want to trust that the company selling them the home understands the difference.

For all the speed, automation and computing power now pouring like a firehose into homebuilding, the sniff test remains old-school.

Does it make common sense? Does it work? Can it reach and sustain positive net margins across housing’s parabolic ups and downs?

And when the promise meets reality, can the people on both sides look one another in the eye and have reason to believe it?

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

San Diego has spent recent years earning a reputation as one of California’s most aggressive housing builders, streamlining permits citywide.

But city leaders hesitated when state law required them to draw boundaries for new housing near neighborhood bus stops. San Diego officials proposed a far tighter map than regional and state regulators wanted. They limited eligible transit stops to just four locations.

That narrower approach didn’t survive engagement with the San Diego Association of Governments, the region’s transit planning authority. SANDAG posted a draft map in June identifying 17 additional bus stops that qualify for high-density housing. The stops qualify under Senate Bill 79, the state’s new transit-oriented development law.

The change could add tens of thousands of housing units to the city’s capacity. Those stops join 47 trolley stations that no one disputes are eligible under the law. SANDAG expects to finalize the map in the coming weeks.

San Diego’s situation reflects a broader statewide struggle. Cities and counties across California are digesting the law, which took effect July 1. Some have embraced it, while others have sought ways around full implementation by phasing in density over years.

In March, Gov. Gavin Newsom threatened to take legal action against noncompliant cities and counties. The warning came as the Los Angeles City Council voted to limit density.

California wasn’t the trendsetter when it enacted this law, unlike its role in other housing reforms. It took three tries over eight years to pass. Massachusetts was the first to set the precedent in 2021, and state officials there are still working with cities on compliance.

City had already moved on density

San Diego embraced density downtown and along major transit corridors before SB 79 passed. In 2020, the city adopted Complete Communities: Housing Solutions to encourage dense, affordable, mixed-income housing near transit stops. In 2024, Mayor Todd Gloria signed an executive order requiring qualifying project permit applications to be processed within 30 days.

The city permitted nearly 8,800 homes that year, the second-most productive year in the previous decade, according to its 2025 annual housing report.

SB 79 added to that density. It permits larger buildings the closer a property sits to a qualifying transit stop.

Within 200 feet of a stop, buildings can reach 140 units per acre and 85 feet. Within a quarter mile, they can reach 100 units per acre and 65 feet. Between a quarter and a half mile, they can reach 80 units per acre and 65 feet.

The city had limited its original proposal to four stops: Park Boulevard at University Avenue, Park Boulevard at Howard Avenue, and two transit plazas where Interstate 15 meets El Cajon Boulevard and University Avenue.

City planning officials counted only bus stops served by dedicated bus lanes that cars and bikes couldn’t use. The interpretation set a stricter bar for what qualifies as “bus rapid transit” under SB 79.

YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County argued to city council members that the law wasn’t that restrictive.

“The City’s position rests on an observation about co-use, not a textual analysis of the statute,” the group wrote in a joint letter with the California Housing Defense Fund to the SANDAG board.

In the letter, they noted that several council members found the statutory case for qualification persuasive during a hearing earlier this year. Council members decided to leave the qualification decision to SANDAG.

“The City Planning Department’s maps presented at the City Council reflected SANDAG guidance at the time they were prepared,” Peter Kelly, a spokesperson for the city’s Planning Department, told the San Diego Union-Tribune. “As we understand it, SANDAG has since received additional guidance, resulting in the inclusion of additional stops in its draft map.”

Stakes go beyond the bus stops

The dispute carries financial and housing stakes. San Diego officials estimated this spring that SB 79 would require the city to allow 367,000 additional housing units near major transit stops, based on the four-stop proposal.

YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County estimate that adding 17 more bus stops will push that number to roughly 467,000 units. The group and city officials say the final figure will likely drop some, to avoid double-counting units already permitted under the city’s Complete Communities program.

Even the expanded list may not be final. Four council members recently sent SANDAG a letter urging the agency to add more stops before finalizing the map.

They argued that only partially including these corridors would create gaps and inconsistent application of SB 79. That inconsistency, they said, would hit routes that run continuously with dedicated bus lanes.

If SANDAG agrees, it opens the door to more potential housing along public transit routes.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

TitleEase has launched a software integration with transaction management platform Contract2Close.com that allows real estate agents and mortgage loan officers to order title services from within the platform.

The integration is designed to incorporate title ordering into the existing transaction management workflow used by residential and commercial real estate professionals.

Services from TitleEase include helping brokerages and lenders own compliant title businesses while providing operational support, compliance and staffing.  

“This integration puts title services directly into the daily workflows of agents and loan officers — eliminating friction and creating a better experience for their clients,” said Joe Durso, CEO of TitleEase “Contract2Close.com is redefining how real estate professionals do business, and we’re proud to be part of that ecosystem.”

Contract2Close.com serves as a transaction management platform for agents, brokerages and service providers.

“Contract2Close.com serves as the operational hub for residential and commercial real estate transactions, connecting agents, brokerages, and service providers through a single streamlined workflow,” said Lauren Schreyer-Merdinger, CEO of Contract2Close.com. “The addition of TitleEase further simplifies the closing process by enabling agents to order title services directly within the platform while leveraging a nationwide title network.”

TitleEase recently spoke to HousingWire regarding increased demand for its franchise-based title insurance model — backed by a recent capital raise, strategic acquisitions and an expanding pipeline of real estate and mortgage partners.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

ONE Sotheby’s International Realty has appointed Shelley Figueroa as sales director in its development division, where she will oversee sales for Anantara Miami Resort & Residences.

Figueroa brings more than 15 years of experience in luxury residential real estate development.

According to the brokerage, she has been involved in more than $3 billion in closed transactions during her career.

“Shelley has built an exceptional reputation for driving luxury development sales and delivering results,” said Daniel de la Vega, president and CEO of ONE Sotheby’s International Realty. “As we expand our development portfolio along Florida’s East Coast, her experience and sharp instincts will directly support our developer partners and strengthen our team.”

Figueroa has worked on several south Florida condominium developments, including 600 Miami Worldcenter, The Crosby, 501 First Residences, Paramount Miami Worldcenter, Brickell TEN, ArteCity South Beach and JEM Miami Worldcenter.

Her experience includes pricing strategy, inventory management, floor plan optimization and sales operations throughout the development process.

“Nobody is moving the needle in new development like ONE Sotheby’s International Realty right now,” said Figueroa.

The brokerage said Figueroa also maintains professional relationships with buyers and industry contacts in Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Chile, Argentina, Spain and New York.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

As part of its three year strategic plan, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) promised members the trade group would work to “elevate” the Realtor brand. For the first half of the year, NAR’s vision for exactly what this effort would look like remained a bit unclear but at the association’s legislative meeting in late-June, things started to come into focus.

At the meeting, NAR told members it was in the process of updating its Trademark Protection Program webpage and pointed members to its Brand Infringement Intake Form if they come across unauthorized uses of the Realtor brand. 

According to NAR, the goals of its Trademark Protection Program “are to preserve the federal trademark registration, create and increase the value of goodwill and maintain the original intended purpose and meaning of the marks.” 

In order to accomplish these goals NAR said misuses of the Realtor marks must be identified and corrected and, as part of the association’s bylaws, members are required to “cooperate and coordinate with NAR in any and all attempts to halt or prevent any unauthorized or improper use of the marks.” 

If a misuse is identified, the party misusing the mark must send NAR a written assurance of compliance with the trademark guidelines, if this is not obtained and/or the misuser continues to misuse the trademark, NAR says it may initiate legal action.

Additionally in its 2025 Annual Report, published in January 2026, NAR told members that it was “leveraging AI tools to strengthen brand protection, allowing NAR to identify trademark infringement earlier than ever before and take appropriate action.” 

All part of the plan

After the passage of its 2026-2028 Strategic Plan, NAR said it was aiming to position the Realtor brand “as a trusted symbol of expertise, integrity and reliable service,” in the eyes of the consumer.  Additionally, in its 2025 Annual Report, NAR told members that it had restructured its legal team to prioritize this mission to protect and promote the Realtor brand and trademarks and that the team designed a seven-stage brand protection strategy, which included things like a comprehensive review of NAR’s intellectual property portfolio and the development of a detailed roadmap for enforcement priorities. 

According to the report, in 2026, NAR said it would release a multipart trademark video series to educate members and staff of proper trademark usage as well as  a trademark toolkit for associations and members that includes turnkey social media assets promoting correct usage of the trademark. The association published these resources earlier this year.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association (NRMLA) is urging the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to overhaul several single-family property standards, arguing that current rules under the Federal Housing Administration (FHA)’s minimum property requirements are creating unnecessary costs and limiting access for older and rural borrowers.

In a June 29 letter to HUD’s Office of General Counsel — responding to a request for information on FHA’s Single Family Minimum Property Requirements — NRMLA said the rules, while intended to ensure safety and habitability, are often applied in ways that “disproportionately impact rural borrowers, senior citizens on fixed incomes, and those residing in older, well-maintained homes.”

The trade group wrote that the FHA’s application of property standards in the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) program should shift toward more flexible, performance-based criteria that better reflect modern lending and risk practices.

One of the association’s primary concerns is FHA’s treatment of shared well systems. NRMLA argued that current requirements are overly prescriptive and often disqualify otherwise financeable properties.

Instead, the group recommended allowing shared wells to qualify based on basic performance and legal safeguards, such as recorded easements, maintenance agreements and water quality protections. It also urged HUD to “grandfather” existing systems that are functioning and compliant with local health standards, and to replace its current approach with a performance-based standard that focuses on practical risk indicators.

NRMLA also called for clearer FHA guidance on swimming pools, saying current rules create uncertainty for appraisers when determining valuation and safety status. The group suggested aligning FHA policy more closely with conventional lending standards, and distinguishing between functional pools and those that are abandoned or unsafe.

Regarding property repairs, the association pushed back on the use of FHA Form 1004D to verify completion of minor repairs, arguing it adds delays and costs. It proposed allowing lenders to use borrower certifications, photographs, invoices and other documentation instead of requiring a second appraisal inspection in all cases.

The group recommended expanding these flexibilities to minor “punch-list” items in new construction loans.

The letter also raised concerns about FHA requirements tied to individual water systems, particularly in rural areas. NRMLA said rules governing wells, springs and surface water sources can be ambiguous and difficult to comply with, especially where testing services are limited.

It recommended allowing alternative sampling methods, such as certified test kits or licensed local professionals, and urged HUD to waive requirements that borrowers connect to public water systems when existing wells are safe and functional.

On water purification systems, NRMLA said current rules requiring lifetime maintenance contracts and complex documentation are “practically impossible to execute” for many senior borrowers. It called for replacing these requirements with a one-time professional inspections and simpler disclosure standards.

Beyond property condition standards, the association also urged HUD to modernize its collateral risk assessment process. It criticized the FHA requirement for second appraisals when valuation flags are triggered, calling it redundant and costly.

Instead, NRMLA recommended allowing the use of automated valuation models, desktop appraisals or targeted field reviews to resolve discrepancies more efficiently.

Across its recommendations, NRMLA argued that the current framework increases transaction costs and delays for older borrowers who seek reverse mortgages under the FHA-insured HECM program.

This article was written by Sarah Wolak and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

For Zane Burnett, technology isn’t about chasing the next shiny object — it’s about building a foundation first.

As he oversees technology, digital strategy and innovation at The Agency, Burnett brings a career’s worth of perspective from leadership roles at proptech companies, luxury real estate brokerages like Alain Pinel Realtors and consultancies including ActivePipe.

Now with The Agency for a little over a year, he’s taking a deliberate approach to artificial intelligence (AI) that starts with clean data, not flashy tools.

Burnett sat down with HousingWire to explain why operational efficiency comes before return on investment (ROI), what humans still do better than machines and how brokerages are now building custom AI solutions for less.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Jonathan Delozier: Where is AI making the biggest difference for The Agency right now — lead generation, marketing, transaction management, etc. — and what measurable results are you seeing?

Zane Burnett: That’s a good question. Right now, I would say that where AI is making the biggest impact is on operational efficiency, which is oftentimes not necessarily the first place people are looking. They want to see the immediate dollars and cents ROI. We’ve taken a pretty deliberate approach to how we implement AI in the sense that from the very start we didn’t look at it as something that we just needed to deploy. It is something that required an operational redesign of how we were going to implement it.

That started out with what most people think of as boring and monotonous work, which is laying the foundation to be able to become an AI-enabled organization. There are a lot of fly-by-night ChatGPT tools out there right now. We’ve turned our head to all of that, and we focus on setting up good data, taking in all of our data sources and making sure we have clean data to layer AI into. 

It’s really helped the company out in things like data and business intelligence, being able to audit workflows and come up with more efficient solutions. That will lead to more efficient lead gen, higher ROI, [and more] but right now the biggest effect has been operational efficiency and being able to do more with less.

Delozier: Beyond the obvious — face-to-face relationships — what’s a less obvious area where humans are still irreplaceable compared to AI?

Burnett: Anything creative is probably my first answer. There’s a quote out there. Ben Affleck is a really vocal voice in Hollywood around AI. He said something that really resonated with me; “Somebody who can do something is a craftsman. Somebody who knows when to stop is an artist.” That really applies for a lot of our creative. We have a brilliant and creative marketing and design team, and while some of us might be using AI to brainstorm, it’s never in place of [our] creative eye.

Something a little less obvious that we’ve run into is as we’ve layered AI into some of these operational efficiencies, we’ve learned that AI is horrible at identifying long strings of numbers and text. An example would be we have some inbound line set up where people can call in and verify things like 10-digit numbers or long strings of characters, and AI starts to get lost in the sauce when you start rattling off digits and character strings.

And of course, compliance — there’s a big push right now for AI to solve transaction management compliance, but it’s never been 100%. It always requires somebody to have eyes on that.

Delozier: Looking at the next three to five years, what are some AI-related skills that agents are going to need to pick up that maybe aren’t jumping out to them right now?

Burnett: I have an interesting response to that, because right now I think every agent is inundated with, “You need to use AI.” There’s a gap between the desire for agents to use AI and the mandate to use AI and the ability to actually execute on that.

That’s largely because agents are too busy to figure out how to go in and connect Claude to a [model context protocol] server and write custom skills. They want something that does it for them — and that makes sense because agents are busy.

I’m going to be a little bit contrarian and say that I don’t know that agents will need to necessarily learn more, because in three to five years the tools will have evolved to cater to the agent’s capability and bandwidth. 

We’re not too far away from custom-built AI solutions that have their own pre-built knowledge base of skills that are there for the agents to just say, “Hey, do this.” The gap between desire and execution and ability to execute keeps shrinking every month or two. It’s not necessarily an increase in an agent’s ability to effectively use AI — it’s an adaptation of the people providing AI tools to work with the agent’s current bandwidth and capabilities.

Delozier: What could fundamentally change about the real estate transaction in that same time period with AI?

Burnett: Let me think about how to say this, because we’re in the business of helping people buy and sell real estate. I think there are some people out there that think you can TurboTax the real estate transaction, and there’s an obvious element of face-to-face required and relationship building that AI and any piece of tech just won’t replace.

I don’t know that there’s going to be huge upheaval in the real estate transaction as we know it. I think there’s going to be an upheaval in people’s perception of what their specific agent is bringing to them in terms of value. The way we counteract that is the same way we’ve been telling everybody for years, which is be an expert at your job.

This is the single largest transaction in a person’s life. As much as that’s repeated, I don’t think it can be overstated how important it is to have somebody there to hold their hand throughout that process. An agent’s relationship-building skills, ability to be an expert on the transaction itself and expert in the industry — that need is never going to go away.

Delozier: What AI initiatives or tools have met your expectations and delivered day-to-day value and which ones haven’t been as useful?

Burnett: Answering the second part of that question first — anything related to compliance and transaction management is touch and go. Every state is different in terms of what their compliance and transaction management needs are. Compliance and transaction management is such a nuanced workflow. I would advise people to be wary of that.

Where I’ve seen a lot of [promise] is any tool for agents who want to run ads or manage their social media. There’s a lot of good brand-building AI solutions out there that are tailored to the individual that have low price points.

On the other end of the spectrum, for business owners, franchise owners or even big box brokerages dealing with massive amounts of data, there are solutions that can handle financial data and help with forecasting, running [profit and loss statements], finding inefficiencies and forecasting market conditions. The same goes for identifying recruiting and retention risks by analyzing the data that brokers have.

Brokers have been hearing for years that they’re sitting on a treasure trove of data.We went through a period where some people were talking about data as the new oil. We’re catching up to ourselves here. Data was and has been one of the single largest assets on the organizational level that brokers have had.

For the last few years, they’ve been trying to figure out what to do with it — like how today they’re hearing about AI and trying to figure out what to do with it. Well, we’ve hit a convergence where this treasure trove of data is now accessible and easy to extrapolate and interpret because we’re in this AI age. We see a lot of brokers do interesting things with the data they’ve been sitting on for years.

Delozier: You mentioned building solutions in-house now. How has that changed the calculus for brokerages?

Burnett: Right now, we’re building stuff in house that traditionally would have required a room full of [developers]. It used to be, “Do we go out and find a solution or do we build it?

If we go out and find something, then we have to decide what we’re willing to bend on in terms of our use cases. If we decide to build something, then there’s an obvious cost to that. 

Right now, we’re saying we’re going to build it, and it’s costing us 90% less to build a very custom solution than it would have two years ago. That’s the most exciting part of it, and that translates directly into agent empowerment and our agents’ ability to do business, as well as our staff.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Tenants demands have been evolving since the start of COVID-19.  While today’s tenants generally need less overall space, the full picture is more complicated than that. When a company is moving into a new space – whether due to right-sizing, relocation, or another need – they need to make the space their own.  This is not about smaller space; it’s about smarter space.

In the past, many landlords would offer a tenant allowance, in which a tenant would need to engage an architect, hire a general contractor, plan and purchase furniture. Though this put more in the tenant’s control, it would greatly extend the amount of time needed for the tenant to properly execute this plan and ran the risk of delivering the space late and over budget.

More recently, the tenant market has moved to speculative suites (spec suites). These spaces are move-in ready, including furniture. The cost is known, and the occupancy date is determined at lease signing.

Spec suites reduce uncertainty in an uncertain decision-making environment. Not only does the timing and cost become more certain, but so does the outcome. Spec suites take the abstract and make it tangible. Tenants can walk a space and understand how it functions, then make decisions faster and with more confidence.

To address the tenants’ needs in this environment, property owners and managers need to keep some key factors in mind.

Think beyond the suite. Tenants are looking for quality from the second they enter the building through the lobby. Attractive lobbies include newer entry systems, well-maintained elevators, updated common corridors and restrooms, modernized LED lighting, etc. These features put the future occupants in the right mindset to envision what could be possible in their space.

Spec suites have and continue to evolve. Once they arrive at the spec suite, they need to feel like their business can thrive in the space. These spaces are more hospitality focused and quality driven than traditional office space. Demand is shifting toward layouts that balance collaboration and focus rather than maximize density.

Flexibility still matters, even within spec. Even though tenants reap the benefit of leasing furnished spaces, they will often have requirements to modify the layout or re-work the design altogether. The design has to work, not just fit. Landlords need to remain nimble. Strategic adjustments to layout or finishes are often part of getting a deal done, but the spec suite fosters the ability of the tenant to “fit” in the space presented with a few minor manipulations.

Make it as turnkey as possible. Tenants are not looking to manage construction projects. Most companies do not have the expertise, nor desire, to run an office buildout. Spec suites eliminate the need to dedicate internal resources to a complex, unfamiliar process. While prospective occupants want to put their stamp on their future home, they want the decisions to be streamlined.

Landlords are increasingly acting as curators, not just providers. The value is in showing tenants what a high-functioning office looks like, how space can be used to support culture, productivity and team interaction. When our industry talks about the “flight to quality,” the motivation is not just about aesthetics but about performance. The office has to compete with working from home. That means it needs to be a place people want to be – comfortable, functional and thoughtfully designed.

Spec suites demonstrate landlord strength and capital investment. Delivering high-quality, move-in-ready space shows that ownership is invested in the asset. That matters to tenants evaluating long-term stability and partnership. In an economic environment when many businesses are constricting, a decision to lease a new office means the business leaders have a vision for enduring success that will be fostered in that space.

Spec suites offer an opportunity for owner-managers to set themselves apart in the new era of office leasing. As hybrid work becomes the standard for most companies, tenants want flexible choices and efficient processes in their office buildout as well.

Image courtesy of Urban Innovations.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Analysts from Keefe, Bruyette & Woods (KBW) say that United Wholesale Mortgage (UWM) may be better off after losing its bid for Two Harbors Investment Corp. They argue that the failed acquisition removes leverage risk and increases the likelihood of a dividend cut that could strengthen the company’s balance sheet.

In a flash note released July 5, KBW analysts Bose George and Frankie Labetti wrote that Two Harbors‘ mortgage servicing rights portfolio would have been a strategic fit for UWM by expanding its servicing business and adding a low-coupon servicing portfolio with opportunities to recapture borrowers through refinancing. But they added that the revised structure of UWM’s bid — which shifted away from its original all-stock proposal — could have materially increased the company’s debt if shareholders largely elected cash.

“Not winning this deal eliminates this risk,” the analysts wrote, adding that there is “limited downside to UWMC from not acquiring TWO.”

The flash note came just days after Two Harbors shareholders approved the company’s sale to CrossCountry Mortgage (CCM), ending a months-long bidding war with UWM.

KBW reiterated its “Outperform” rating on UWM with a $3.75 price target, citing the stock’s depressed valuation and the potential for the company to improve its balance sheet. The firm said UWM’s debt-to-equity ratio stands at roughly 3.1x, “well above” many of its peers, and argued that reducing its dividend could accelerate deleveraging.

KBW estimates that if UWM cut its quarterly dividend by at least half, the company could reduce its debt-to-equity ratio from 3.1x presently to about 2.4x by the end of 2027.

The firm’s base-case forecast assumes an even steeper cut — about 70%, lowering the quarterly dividend from 10 cents per share to 3 cents. The analysts say this would bring leverage down to roughly 2.2x over the same period.

Analysts said a dividend cut would allow UWM to keep more cash and reduce debt. They noted the company currently pays about $640 million in dividends each year, more than it is expected to earn for the rest of 2026.

KBW also pointed to UWM’s recent share price decline, noting the stock has fallen about 50% year to date compared with roughly 19% for Rocket Companies. The firm said UWM is trading at about five times its estimated 2027 earnings, which it described as historically low.

The completed acquisition also significantly expands CrossCountry Mortgage‘s servicing footprint.

“Post-deal, CCM would meaningfully grow its roughly $200 billion existing servicing book to over $360 billion. Based on Inside Mortgage Finance data, this would make CCM the 8th-largest servicer in the country, up from 14th. The company is also the 2nd-largest retail originator (after RKT) and top distributed retail originator,” the analysts wrote.

The shareholder approval concludes a merger contest that began in December when UWM announced an all-stock agreement to acquire Two Harbors. The process included multiple competing bids from CrossCountry, several postponed shareholder meetings and revised offers before the Two Harbors board ultimately recommended the acceptance of the CCM proposal.

This article was written by Sarah Wolak and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

A question is starting to circulate among brokerage leaders and at industry tables: Is it time to do away with IDX? On the surface it sounds like a housekeeping matter, a debate about website feeds and display rules. It is not. The IDX question is one of the most important structural questions our industry faces, because it is really a question about who owns the market.

What IDX actually does

For readers who don’t live inside the plumbing of listing data: IDX, short for Internet Data Exchange, is the permission-based system that lets every participating broker display the full pool of MLS listings on their own website. You agree to show other brokers’ listings, and in return, your listings appear on theirs. It turned the MLS from a back-office database into broad public reach spread across thousands of broker and agent sites.

IDX is also separate from portal syndication — the feeds that send listings to Zillow, Realtor.com and Redfin run on different agreements. That separation matters, because it means the industry could, in theory, switch off broker-to-broker sharing while leaving the portal feeds running. The real question is whether doing so would be wise.

Why the question is being asked now

The timing is not random. In January, Compass completed its purchase of Anywhere Real Estate and became the largest brokerage in the world, with roughly 340,000 agents operating under Compass International Holdings. Compass has built its growth around a brokerage-led model in which a large share of new listings begin inside the company’s own network, as Private Exclusives or Coming Soon properties, before reaching the MLS, if they reach it at all.

When a single company reaches that scale, the logic of sharing changes. Why distribute your inventory to every competitor’s website when you can keep it inside your own walls, where you control the buyer, the lead and the data the listing generates?

That is the real engine behind the IDX question. It is not a debate about website quality. It is a debate about data ownership and market control.

What removing IDX would actually do

Strip IDX out of the system and the shape of the market changes in three predictable ways.

First, broker websites stop showing the full market. A consumer who wants to see everything for sale would no longer find it on the average broker or agent site. They would have to go to the one place that still displays it all, which is a portal. In other words, switching off broker sharing while leaving portal feeds on would hand the portals even more control over the consumer’s first search. The industry would be shrinking its own reach and feeding the very platforms it has spent years worrying about.

Second, the advantage tilts hard toward the largest companies. A broker’s website is only as valuable as the inventory it can show. When sharing ends, the sites worth visiting are the ones owned by the companies with the most listings. The independent and mid-size brokerage, which today competes on a level field because IDX lets it display the same inventory as the national brand, loses that field overnight. A bigger share of listings for the biggest companies turns into a bigger share of where buyers look.

Third, sellers lose exposure and exposure is the entire point of listing on the MLS. Broad distribution creates more buyers, more competition and stronger prices. Zillow’s analysis of millions of transactions found a measurable price difference between homes given full market exposure and those marketed privately, in the range of roughly 1.5% to 3.7%, with the higher end concentrated in markets like California and New York.

The mechanism is simple. Fewer buyers see the home, so there is less competition to bid it up. IDX is one of the largest engines of that broad exposure. Remove it and the seller’s audience contracts to whoever happens to visit a single brokerage’s site.

The pattern of who benefits

Step back and a pattern emerges. The parties that would gain from ending IDX are the portals and the largest brokerages. The parties that would lose are independent brokers, sellers seeking the widest audience and the shared, broker-owned marketplace itself.

That is worth sitting with, because it mirrors the broader dynamic in today’s market. In the contest between the biggest brokerages and the portals over who controls listing data, nearly every outcome leaves the traditional MLS as the casualty. Ending IDX would simply speed that outcome along.

Reform, not removal

None of this means IDX is flawless. The display rules can be inconsistent across markets, the feeds can lag and the participation requirements can be burdensome. Those are real problems. But the answer to a flawed shared system is targeted repair, not demolition. Demolition only transfers control to whoever is standing in the strongest position. Right now, that’s not the independent broker or the local MLS.

The more constructive path runs the other direction. Rather than dismantling the one mechanism that keeps the marketplace open and broadly accessible, MLS and industry leadership should be strengthening broker-owned sharing and modernizing it, so brokers do not feel they have to leave the shared system to compete.

The value of the MLS has always come from its completeness. Every listing in one place, visible to every cooperating broker and every buyer. Protecting that completeness, and the broad website distribution IDX provides, is protecting the thing that makes the MLS worth belonging to.

Before the industry entertains doing away with IDX, leaders should be clear about what the question really is. It is not about feeds and display rules. It is about whether the market stays open and broadly accessible, or whether control over what buyers see moves into a smaller and smaller number of hands.

Phrased that way, the answer should give every independent broker and every MLS pause.

Darryl Davis, CSP, is a real estate coach, speaker, and bestselling author with more than 40 years in the industry. Through his POWER AGENT® Coaching Program, he helps real estate professionals build careers and lives worth smiling about. Learn more at DarrylSpeaks.com.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Mortgage lenders continued to reshuffle their sales forces last week as 266 loan originators changed employers and 1,823 individuals obtained Nationwide Multistate Licensing System (NMLS) licenses, according to RETR‘s new mortgage market intelligence report released Monday.

Venkata Rajaneesh Jandhyam, who originated $118.7 million across 206 loans during the past 14 months, joined California-based Tri Valley Home Loans LLC, representing the largest recent production volume among originators who changed companies. Sreedhar Seelam, with $111.4 million in production, also joined Tri Valley Home Loans.

Other notable moves include Ryan Stambaugh and Sam Hardy joining Union Home Mortgage Corp.; Andrew Russell, Robert Yusupov and Kelly Cordero joining CrossCountry Mortgage; Mohammed Shamsudin joining Rate; and Kalliope Orlando joining NewRez.

Among nonbank and credit union lenders, Peak Residential Lending posted the largest gain in producer volume at 11.09%, followed by Northern Mortgage at 5.67%, Hometown Lending at 4.59%, Compass Mortgage at 3.28% and RenoFi at 2.83%.

RETR introduces Agent Loyalty Index

The report also examined how consistently Realtors work with mortgage lending partners, finding that loyalty varies widely by state. Hawaii ranked as the state where agents are most likely to repeatedly work with the same lenders, while North Dakota ranked at the bottom of the list.

The findings are based on RETR’s Agent Loyalty Index (ALI), introduced at the end of June to measure how concentrated a real estate agent’s mortgage lending relationships are.

The index is scored on a scale of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating agents direct most of their business to one or a small group of lenders, while lower scores indicate business is spread across multiple lending partners.

Hawaii posted the highest average ALI score at 5.64, followed by Nevada (5.54), Utah (5.49), Pennsylvania (5.47) and California (5.39).

At the other end of the rankings, North Dakota recorded the lowest average score at 4.11, followed by Wisconsin (4.24), Iowa (4.32), West Virginia (4.35) and Nebraska (4.45).

According to the report, the gap between Hawaii and North Dakota highlights differing competitive dynamics across local housing markets, rather than indicating that specific markets are stronger than others.

In states with higher ALI scores, Realtors are more likely to maintain long-standing relationships with a limited number of preferred mortgage lenders, making it more difficult for loan officers to establish new referral partnerships. Markets with lower scores tend to feature more diversified lender relationships, where agents are already accustomed to working with multiple lenders.

The report said the index can help mortgage professionals to understand “where Realtor relationships are concentrated can influence recruiting, market expansion, partnership strategy and sales expectations.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Mortgage lenders continued to reshuffle their sales forces last week as 266 loan originators changed employers and 1,823 individuals obtained Nationwide Multistate Licensing System (NMLS) licenses, according to RETR‘s new mortgage market intelligence report released Monday.

Venkata Rajaneesh Jandhyam, who originated $118.7 million across 206 loans during the past 14 months, joined California-based Tri Valley Home Loans LLC, representing the largest recent production volume among originators who changed companies. Sreedhar Seelam, with $111.4 million in production, also joined Tri Valley Home Loans.

Other notable moves include Ryan Stambaugh and Sam Hardy joining Union Home Mortgage Corp.; Andrew Russell, Robert Yusupov and Kelly Cordero joining CrossCountry Mortgage; Mohammed Shamsudin joining Rate; and Kalliope Orlando joining NewRez.

Among nonbank and credit union lenders, Peak Residential Lending posted the largest gain in producer volume at 11.09%, followed by Northern Mortgage at 5.67%, Hometown Lending at 4.59%, Compass Mortgage at 3.28% and RenoFi at 2.83%.

RETR introduces Agent Loyalty Index

The report also examined how consistently Realtors work with mortgage lending partners, finding that loyalty varies widely by state. Hawaii ranked as the state where agents are most likely to repeatedly work with the same lenders, while North Dakota ranked at the bottom of the list.

The findings are based on RETR’s Agent Loyalty Index (ALI), introduced at the end of June to measure how concentrated a real estate agent’s mortgage lending relationships are.

The index is scored on a scale of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating agents direct most of their business to one or a small group of lenders, while lower scores indicate business is spread across multiple lending partners.

Hawaii posted the highest average ALI score at 5.64, followed by Nevada (5.54), Utah (5.49), Pennsylvania (5.47) and California (5.39).

At the other end of the rankings, North Dakota recorded the lowest average score at 4.11, followed by Wisconsin (4.24), Iowa (4.32), West Virginia (4.35) and Nebraska (4.45).

According to the report, the gap between Hawaii and North Dakota highlights differing competitive dynamics across local housing markets, rather than indicating that specific markets are stronger than others.

In states with higher ALI scores, Realtors are more likely to maintain long-standing relationships with a limited number of preferred mortgage lenders, making it more difficult for loan officers to establish new referral partnerships. Markets with lower scores tend to feature more diversified lender relationships, where agents are already accustomed to working with multiple lenders.

The report said the index can help mortgage professionals to understand “where Realtor relationships are concentrated can influence recruiting, market expansion, partnership strategy and sales expectations.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Last month, Florida homebuyers Jeff and Melissa Efron filed a lawsuit challenging a $475 transaction fee they were charged by their broker Compass upon the close of their August 2024 home purchase. 

While it may seem surprising that consumers are willing to risk tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees over a fee totaling less than $500, attorneys in the real estate space do not find this litigation all that surprising, given the lawsuits facing the real estate industry over the past few years. 

“Pre-commission lawsuit settlement, these agents didn’t have to sit down and explain their fees, so if any consumers are looking at past transaction history they can see these fees and they have no idea what it even applies to and now it may be coming back up for them,” Wendy Gilch, the founder of Selling Later and a fellow at the Consumer Policy Center, told HousingWire. 

Since the terms of the National Association of Realtors’ (NAR) commission lawsuit settlement agreement went into effect in mid-August 2024, buyers’ agents have been required to obtain a signed buyer broker agreement prior to touring a home with a buyer outlining the agent’s compensation and the terms of the relationship. Prior to this, buyer broker agreements were only required in some states, meaning that some agents most likely never took the time to explain to their buyers how they were compensated and what different fees or charges went towards. 

Post-settlement scrutiny 

However, it is this post-settlement environment with its increased scrutiny on agent compensation that attorneys feel is potentially fueling lawsuits like this one, as well as those concerning referral fees. While Compass called their fee a “transaction fee,” attorneys said other firms call similar fees “administrative fees” or “regulatory compliance fees,” claiming that the fee is necessary to pay for things like properly executed paperwork. 

“I hate that there are so many lawsuits, but in a way it’s good that these conversations are coming up so the public can understand that fees like this are not mandatory, and they should try to negotiate them along with their agent’s commission,” Gilch said. 

For Doug Miller, an attorney at Miller Law PLLC and one of the attorneys who filed the Moehrl suit, one of the original commission lawsuits, these fees have no place in an already costly real estate transaction.

“There is no logical reason for them and they never should have started charging them,” Miller said. “Consumers have been paying the price with them for a long time.” 

Both Miller and Gilch said they have seen and heard agents refer to these fees as junk fees. Gilch said many of these agents have sought the Transparent Agent Certification launched by her platform Housing Rebel by Selling Later. 

“The fact that they are putting these fees in a purchase agreement is ridiculous, it needs to be disclosed early on and if you are charging it, you need to be clear as to what it is paying for and why you need the additional money,” Miller said of agents and brokerages charging consumers some type of transaction fee.

Appetite for more 

According to Miller, if this lawsuit succeeds in obtaining class action status, he would not be surprised if other copycat lawsuits began to proliferate.

“Anytime a class action like this is filed, if it looks like it has legs, there will be copycat lawsuits,” he said. 

He added that based on the wager these consumers are making by spending thousands in legal fees over a $475 transaction fee, they must be fairly confident the suit will obtain class action status. 

“I can’t imagine how this wouldn’t have all the elements of a good class action lawsuit,” Miller said. “I think there are going to be too many issues in the plaintiffs’ favor, and I think it will be a fairly easy case.” 

Industry impact

If these lawsuits do proliferate and there is an increased public awareness of these fees, Gilch sees the potential for an increased appetite for alternative homebuying methods. 

“If people really start to question the fees and how much things cost, I think they are going to begin looking into other avenues of how things work,” Gilch said. “I think more consumers are going to look at opportunities for buyer models that are different from what has always been done.” 

For Gilch this could mean an increase in popularity for things like á la carte buyer broker services or even more consumers using AI agent programs to assist in their homebuying journeys. 

Time will tell if other consumers are willing to risk a mountain of legal fees over a less than $1,000 transaction and if these Florida homebuyer plaintiffs will ultimately be the catalyst for the next wave of real estate agent compensation reform. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Last month, Florida homebuyers Jeff and Melissa Efron filed a lawsuit challenging a $475 transaction fee they were charged by their broker Compass upon the close of their August 2024 home purchase. 

While it may seem surprising that consumers are willing to risk tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees over a fee totaling less than $500, attorneys in the real estate space do not find this litigation all that surprising, given the lawsuits facing the real estate industry over the past few years. 

“Pre-commission lawsuit settlement, these agents didn’t have to sit down and explain their fees, so if any consumers are looking at past transaction history they can see these fees and they have no idea what it even applies to and now it may be coming back up for them,” Wendy Gilch, the founder of Selling Later and a fellow at the Consumer Policy Center, told HousingWire. 

Since the terms of the National Association of Realtors’ (NAR) commission lawsuit settlement agreement went into effect in mid-August 2024, buyers’ agents have been required to obtain a signed buyer broker agreement prior to touring a home with a buyer outlining the agent’s compensation and the terms of the relationship. Prior to this, buyer broker agreements were only required in some states, meaning that some agents most likely never took the time to explain to their buyers how they were compensated and what different fees or charges went towards. 

Post-settlement scrutiny 

However, it is this post-settlement environment with its increased scrutiny on agent compensation that attorneys feel is potentially fueling lawsuits like this one, as well as those concerning referral fees. While Compass called their fee a “transaction fee,” attorneys said other firms call similar fees “administrative fees” or “regulatory compliance fees,” claiming that the fee is necessary to pay for things like properly executed paperwork. 

“I hate that there are so many lawsuits, but in a way it’s good that these conversations are coming up so the public can understand that fees like this are not mandatory, and they should try to negotiate them along with their agent’s commission,” Gilch said. 

For Doug Miller, an attorney at Miller Law PLLC and one of the attorneys who filed the Moehrl suit, one of the original commission lawsuits, these fees have no place in an already costly real estate transaction.

“There is no logical reason for them and they never should have started charging them,” Miller said. “Consumers have been paying the price with them for a long time.” 

Both Miller and Gilch said they have seen and heard agents refer to these fees as junk fees. Gilch said many of these agents have sought the Transparent Agent Certification launched by her platform Housing Rebel by Selling Later. 

“The fact that they are putting these fees in a purchase agreement is ridiculous, it needs to be disclosed early on and if you are charging it, you need to be clear as to what it is paying for and why you need the additional money,” Miller said of agents and brokerages charging consumers some type of transaction fee.

Appetite for more 

According to Miller, if this lawsuit succeeds in obtaining class action status, he would not be surprised if other copycat lawsuits began to proliferate.

“Anytime a class action like this is filed, if it looks like it has legs, there will be copycat lawsuits,” he said. 

He added that based on the wager these consumers are making by spending thousands in legal fees over a $475 transaction fee, they must be fairly confident the suit will obtain class action status. 

“I can’t imagine how this wouldn’t have all the elements of a good class action lawsuit,” Miller said. “I think there are going to be too many issues in the plaintiffs’ favor, and I think it will be a fairly easy case.” 

Industry impact

If these lawsuits do proliferate and there is an increased public awareness of these fees, Gilch sees the potential for an increased appetite for alternative homebuying methods. 

“If people really start to question the fees and how much things cost, I think they are going to begin looking into other avenues of how things work,” Gilch said. “I think more consumers are going to look at opportunities for buyer models that are different from what has always been done.” 

For Gilch this could mean an increase in popularity for things like á la carte buyer broker services or even more consumers using AI agent programs to assist in their homebuying journeys. 

Time will tell if other consumers are willing to risk a mountain of legal fees over a less than $1,000 transaction and if these Florida homebuyer plaintiffs will ultimately be the catalyst for the next wave of real estate agent compensation reform. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Want to live closer to IKEA? A housing lottery opened for 239 mixed-income apartments in a new three-building residential complex in the heart of Red Hook, Brooklyn. Rising eight stories at 498 Columbia Street, the building is the largest of Columbia Commons, the first modern large-scale residential development in the waterfront neighborhood, according to the New York Real Estate Journal. New Yorkers earning 40, 60, and 100 percent of the area median income can apply for the apartments, priced from $777/month studios to $2,668/month two-bedrooms.

Developed by Express Buildings and nonprofit service provider the Jericho Project, the building will deliver 100 percent affordable and supportive housing units in Red Hook. The Jericho Project will provide on-site services to meet residents’ needs, according to NYREJ.

The three-phase project, designed by Aufgang Architects, will deliver a total of 661 units across three eight-story buildings. Units in the first phase consist of 134 studios, 121 one-bedrooms, and 114 two-bedroom units, according to an Instagram post by Aufgang.

Amenities include bike storage lockers, a shared laundry room, outdoor spaces, and a community center. The apartments are equipped with energy-efficient appliances and high-speed internet.

While the neighborhood lacks a subway station, residents can access the B57 and B61 buses, as well as the NYC Ferry, which docks at Atlantic Basin. On Saturdays and Sundays only, the free NY Waterway Ferry travels between Midtown and Pier 11/Wall Street and IKEA.

Qualifying New Yorkers can apply for the apartments until August 28, 2026. Complete details on how to apply are available here. Preference for 20 percent of the units will be given to residents of Brooklyn Community Board 6.

Questions regarding this offer must be referred to NYC’s Housing Connect department by dialing 311.

RELATED:

The post Red Hook rental opens lottery for 239 affordable apartments, from $777/month first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

This glittering penthouse duplex atop the Sky Lofts condominium at 145 Hudson Street served as the trophy pad of hedge funder Bobby Axelrod, the main character in ‘Billions’ (played by Damian Lewis). And if you possess actual billions, it might not be too much of a stretch to be the next owner of the 7,500-square-foot home, which is asking $59,500,000. Along with palatial interiors encased in museum-quality insulated glass, the penthouse is wrapped by 4,500 square feet of terrace for a 24-hour New York City skyline panorama effect. A renovation helmed by PHDesign spared no expense, of course.

As first reported by the New York Post, the Tribeca penthouse is owned by William Duker, a “former attorney turned investor” who spent three years in jail for defrauding the government in the 1990s. Duker later founded the electric document discovery firm Amici, which was acquired by Xerox in 2006, and Rational Enterprise. In addition to the Manhattan property, Duker also listed his Miami penthouse for $78 million.

“I’m 72, and I’m just beginning to organize this next phase of my life. The last thing I need now are two apartments of this size,” Duker told the Post.

Luxury fixtures and finishes throughout the Hudson Street home include wall paneling of cerused oak, bespoke doors with brass inlay details, Nanz hardware, and artisan-finished windows, radiator covers, and stairs.

Designer light fixtures by Holly Hunt, Michael Anastassiades, Pureedge, Henge, and Kreon cast a glow above custom-fabricated Italian smoked oak herringbone-patterned flooring.

Twenty-first-century comforts meet timeless craftsmanship, from walls and ceilings of hand-troweled plaster to a state-of-the-art high-tech security system and comprehensive humidification and climate control. A large laundry room is an additional convenience.

A private key-locked elevator opens to a double-height great room with 18-foot ceilings. Floor-to-ceiling windows offer unobstructed views of One World Trade Center. The space is anchored by a majestic two-story wood-burning fireplace with a travertine hearth. In every room, massive glass panels slide apart to reveal the wraparound terrace for a 360-degree outdoor view of the Hudson River and the city skyline.

A chef-worthy kitchen features cerused oak cabinetry, brass wall paneling, and an Italian silver travertine backsplash. Worktops are Italian stoneglass, and appliances are by Gaggenau.

Also on this lower level are a cozy den, a formal dining room, and a double-height library/media room. A game room with an en-suite bath could be a fourth bedroom.

Up a steel and glass stair are the home’s private bedroom suites. The corner primary suite overlooks the Hudson River and offers sweeping city vistas, two walk-in closets, and a wood-burning fireplace. The attendant bath wears travertine and gets a steam shower and a Boffi soaking tub. Two additional bedroom suites also have capacious closets, spectacular views, and luxurious baths, all of which feature polished concrete flooring and radiant heating.

Built in 1929 as a printing factory, the 21-unit condominium offers all residents a 24-hour doorman, an elegant lobby, and a landscaped shared roof deck. Three private dedicated parking spaces are reserved for the penthouse.

[Listing details: 145 Hudson Street, #PH at CityRealty]

[At Compass by Jim St. Andre, Trevor Stephens, and Michael Maniawski]

[At Modlin Group by Adam D. Modlin and Andrew Nierenberg]

RELATED:

The post For $59.5M, live in Bobby Axelrod’s Tribeca penthouse from ‘Billions’ first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Generation Z accounted for a record 20% of home purchase rate locks in the second quarter, marking the largest share on record as younger buyers continue to gain ground despite ongoing affordability challenges, according to Intercontinental Exchange (ICE)’s July 2026 Mortgage Monitor.

The report, released Monday, found that Gen Z now represents nearly one-third of all first-time homebuyer loans and 27% of Federal Housing Administration (FHA) purchase mortgages. As the oldest members of the generation approaching age 29, ICE said Gen Z’s share of the home purchase market is expected to continue growing.

“Gen Z’s rise to nearly 20% of rate locks is one of the clearest signs yet of a generational handoff in the homebuying market,” Andy Walden, ICE’s head of mortgage and housing market research, said in a statement. “Despite facing one of the tougher affordability environments in decades, younger buyers are finding ways to become homeowners.”

The report offered a glimpse into generational homebuying trends. “Together, Gen Z and millennials account for nearly two-thirds of the 2026 purchase lending market — a clear sign that younger, more tech-savvy generations now dominate purchase mortgage lending,” the report noted.

In contrast, baby boomers made up just 11% of purchase lending but accounted for 31% of cash-out refinance activity. ICE said boomers also carried higher debt-to-income ratios on cash-out refinances than other generations, suggesting some borrowers are stretching their budgets to access home equity accumulated during recent home price gains.

Affordability pressures are also prompting buyers to seek alternative funding sources for down payments. While 71% of homebuyers relied on personal savings, 29% used other sources such as family gifts, loans or retirement savings, the highest share in seven years.

Among Gen Z buyers, 13% relied on a family gift and 8% used a loan to fund their down payment. Baby boomers were more likely than any other generation to use retirement savings.

“For lenders and servicers, the generational shift in the borrower base is more than a demographic footnote, it’s a competitive inflection point,” said Bob Hart, president of ICE Mortgage Technology. “As Gen Z enters the market in force, organizations that have modernized their technology stack and customer engagement capabilities will be far better positioned to serve the next wave of homebuyers.”

Housing market trends

Home prices also continued to strengthen. ICE’s Home Price Index showed annual appreciation accelerated for a fourth straight month to 1.3% in June, the strongest annual growth rate in more than a year.

On a seasonally adjusted basis, prices rose 0.29% for the month, matching the average pace of the previous three months despite higher mortgage rates.

The report found that 72% of housing markets posted higher home prices than a year earlier — the largest share in more than a year — while 91% recorded seasonally adjusted price gains in June. ICE said nearly 87% of markets are experiencing accelerating price growth, putting annual appreciation on pace to exceed 3% by the end of the year if current trends continue.

Single-family homes continued to outperform condominiums, with single-family prices rising 1.6% annually while condo prices declined 0.8%. Nearly all major markets continued to show weaker condo price performance than single-family homes.

Among major metropolitan areas, Rochester, New York, posted the strongest annual home price growth at 7.3%, followed by the Connecticut metros of Hartford and Bridgeport at 6.2% each.

Price momentum has been strongest across parts of the South and Midwest, including Louisville, Kentucky; Miami; Jacksonville, Florida; Knoxville, Tennessee; Tampa; and Memphis, Tennessee; while Southern California markets such as Los Angeles, Riverside and Oxnard remained largely flat. Home prices also edged lower in Honolulu and Denver.

Despite strengthening home prices, inventory has continued to increase, which ICE said could moderate appreciation in the months ahead.

Mortgage delinquencies build

Separately, mortgage performance data showed the national delinquency rate rose 15 basis points to 3.5% in May. ICE said the increase was largely driven by the calendar, as May 31 fell on a Sunday, delaying the processing of scheduled mortgage payments into June. Similar month-end timing effects occurred in 2009 and 2015, producing nearly identical increases in early-stage delinquencies.

The report noted that while the rise in early-stage delinquencies was largely a timing issue, more serious mortgage distress continues to build. The number of loans at least 90 days delinquent or in active foreclosure increased by 185,000 from a year earlier, the largest annual increase since the pandemic-driven spike in 2020.

The increase continues to be concentrated among FHA loans. The share of FHA mortgages that were seriously delinquent or in active foreclosure rose 1.9 percentage points from a year ago. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) loans saw a smaller increase, while conventional and portfolio loans were flat to slightly lower.

Foreclosure starts declined 9% from April to about 33,000 in May, the lowest monthly level since November 2025, although they remained 19% higher than a year earlier. Active foreclosure inventory climbed to roughly 280,000 loans, up 34% from May 2025 and the highest level in six years after increasing in nine of the past 10 months.

ICE also found that mortgages originated in 2022 or later account for a growing share of foreclosure activity, representing 39% of foreclosure starts, 34% of active foreclosure inventory and 43% of foreclosure sales.

The report noted that borrowers who purchased homes during the higher-rate environment with limited subsequent home price appreciation are becoming a larger portion of distressed mortgages.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The most dangerous pitch in business is not that a tool is powerful. It is that a tool will make a hard business easy.

That, I’d argue, is the sales pitch surrounding artificial intelligence in land today.

Find sites faster. Underwrite instantly. Source off-market deals at scale. Remove friction from development. Turn messy local markets into clean digital dashboards. The language sounds modern, but the premise is old: trust the system, skip the grind, centralize the intelligence and let the machine collapse complexity for you.

That is exactly why so much of the current AI conversation in real estate feels overstated. The software may be new, and the workflows it is designed to improve may now be more clearly recognized as data fields.

The temptation to call that a solution is not. Every generation produces its own version of the same fantasy: enough data, enough models, enough centralized logic, and the difficult parts of human judgment will disappear.

Land development is where that fantasy goes to die.

Land is not a search problem

Land development is not fundamentally a search problem. Rather, it’s a human judgment challenge.

Most markets already have no shortage of parcel maps, tax records, owner lists, zoning layers, broker packages, aerial imagery, demographic reports, traffic counts and speculative opportunities. The industry is not suffering because dirt is hard to find. There is dirt everywhere.

The hard part is determining what that dirt can actually become.

Can it be entitled? Can it be served? Can utilities reach it at a cost basis that still pencils? Will planning staff support it after the first angry neighborhood meeting? Will the city council remain constructive when the room fills up? Will the school district, water provider, transportation department, and fire marshal all align so the project can proceed?

A model can sort parcels, summarize zoning text, compare sale comps, flag anomalies in ownership data, and identify floodplain, slope, access and proximity to infrastructure.

That is useful.

What it cannot, on its own, reveal to a developer is whether the mayor is tired of apartments, whether the city engineer is about to require another million dollars in off-site improvements, whether the builder’s “interest” is genuine or merely corporate politeness, whether the lender will remain patient after a six-month delay, or whether the neighborhood opposition is loud but harmless or organized enough to kill the deal.

None of those factors is merely data entry. All of that is human experience.

A developer walking a site with a city manager, a utility director and a skeptical neighbor knows things that will never fully appear in a database.

The assumption is that, with AI, complexity can be ingested, normalized, optimized and automated away. In land development, that assumption breaks fast.

Dirt does not obey the dashboard

A development site is more than a parcel ID.

It is access. It is drainage. It is politics. It is neighbors. It is utilities. It is school capacity. It is fire response. It is road timing. It is title. It is soil. It is market depth. It is a builder’s appetite. It is lender confidence. It is city staff turnover. It is a council election. It is one angry retired lawyer with time, money, and a printer.

A spreadsheet can miss all of that. So can AI. The seductive part of AI is that it makes the first pass feel powerful. A user can scan thousands of sites, identify “underutilized” parcels, rank opportunities, build automated underwriting assumptions, and generate polished investment summaries in minutes.

That feels like progress. Sometimes it is. But the first pass is not the business. The business begins when the first pass meets the ground. The land business is full of sites that look obvious from 30,000 feet and impossible at five feet. It is also full of sites that look ugly in a database but become great deals because someone understands the local path better than the market does.

That is where money is made. Not by seeing what everyone else sees faster, but by understanding what everyone else misunderstands.

What AI can actually do

The right critique of AI is not that it is useless. That would be foolish. AI will almost certainly become a standard part of the land development stack.

When used properly, it can reduce clerical drag and improve first-pass analysis. It can help teams connect fragmented parcel, zoning, sales, ownership, and demographic datasets. It can summarize lengthy public documents. It can compare municipal codes. It can flag inconsistencies in due diligence files. It can speed internal screening. It can help organize correspondence, meeting notes, entitlement timelines, and lender materials.

That is real value, but it is incremental, not magic.

AI can help an experienced operator move faster. It cannot turn an inexperienced operator into a great developer. It can improve the workflow. It cannot replace judgment. It can produce a cleaner memo. It cannot make the council vote yes. It can find a parcel. It cannot make the water line appear.

The winners in land will use AI as leverage, not blind faith.

They will use it to eliminate repetitive work so their best people can spend more time on strategy, negotiation, political insight, engineering judgment, capital structure, and risk. They will not hand the steering wheel to a model and pretend the road is straight.

The real edge still looks old-fashioned

The teams that outperform in land still do the hard things well. They know the market street by street. They understand which cities want growth and which only say they do. They know the difference between a polite builder meeting and a real builder commitment. They understand cost basis. They respect offsite costs. They read counterparties. They know when to push and when to pause. They understand that a cheap piece of land can become expensive the moment engineering gets honest.

They also know that entitlement is not a formality. It is a campaign. Utilities are not a checkbox. They are often the deal. Capital is not just money. It is temperament. Timing is not an assumption. It is a risk.

AI can assist with all of that. It cannot own any of it.

That distinction matters because the current market is hungry for shortcuts. Land development is hard, rates have been volatile, builders have become more selective, cities are politically sensitive, and capital demands more certainty than the business can honestly provide.

Into that environment comes the perfect pitch: the machine will make it easier. That is the oldest bad idea in a new suit. AI thinking assumes the messiness is the problem. In reality, the messiness is often where the truth lives.

The sale and the reality

The easy sale is “AI will find the land.” The harder truth is that land was never the mystery. The mystery is whether a site can survive contact with the real world: planning staff, neighbors, utilities, engineers, lenders, builders, lawyers, elections, delays and time. No software can remove that test.

The best developers are not anti-technology. They are anti-fantasy. They will adopt useful tools, automate what should be automated, and use AI to move faster, see more, and reduce wasted effort. But they will not mistake a better screen for a better deal.

Land development remains a business of judgment, risk, endurance, and local truth. It rewards those who walk the site, know the town, understand the politics, establish the basis, and stay in the fight when the clean assumptions get dirty.

AI may become a useful layer in the stack, and even an essential one.

But it will not make land development easy. And any product sold on that premise is probably valued less for the results it can deliver than for the fantasy it allows people to believe.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

America has historically leaned heavily on the government-backed Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) program as a way for older homeowners to tap into their equity. But amid higher interest rates and steep upfront costs, private-sector alternatives are aggressively stepping in to fill the void.

Proprietary reverse mortgages in the U.S. are evolving to offer higher loan-to-value ratios, lower upfront costs and second-lien options, reaching more than half the market in the first quarter of 2026. But even as product offerings evolve, industry leaders are looking overseas for a road map to further innovation.

“We’re still relatively nascent in the non-government portion of the business compared with the rest of the world,” Chris Mayer, CEO of Longbridge Financial, said in an interview with HousingWire’s Reverse Mortgage Daily (RMD).

Mayer noted that markets in Europe — particularly the United Kingdom, which boasts a highly mature “later-life lending” sector — demonstrate the benefits of diverse funding sources. Abroad, life insurance companies routinely hold loans on their balance sheets and financial planners integrate equity release into holistic retirement strategies.

To unpack these market dynamics and explore the road ahead, RMD sat down with Mayer to discuss the core challenges limiting today’s HECM program, the ongoing evolution of proprietary products, and the crucial lessons American lenders can borrow from abroad to better serve borrowers.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Flávia Nunes: When you look at the U.S. market for senior homeowner financing solutions, what’s the core problem?

Chris Mayer: We’re still relatively nascent in the non-government portion of the business compared with the rest of the world. There are a couple places in Asia that have some government-backed programs, but they’re small. Nobody has anything like HECM, which has had a significant effect on product development.

The HECM has things you would never be able to do in the private market. Nobody is going to create a product where the principal limit grows every year and you can draw at the underlying note rate, up to that maximum, for an unlimited period — you could live 30 years. And there aren’t many places where, if your house burns down in an L.A. fire, you can continue to draw proceeds as long as you commit to rebuilding the home.

Nunes: But how does the HECM cost compare to other products?

Mayer: The interest rate in the HECM product is low relative to most parts of the world. You get a loan that is 2% to 2.5% above the index rate, plus a 50 basis-point insurance premium. The flip side is this: The underwriting hasn’t changed as interest rates rose in 2022. The HECM continues to have lower interest rates, generating bigger surpluses.

Also, the upfront insurance fee is not a share of what your principal limit is. It is a share of the home value. For example, imagine you can take 40% of the home value, paying two points on the home value. If you live in a $400,000 home, you’re going to pay $8,000 upfront to access $160,000. That’s five points on the amount of money that you take out.

People look at that and say, ‘That is just expensive.’ The principal limits haven’t changed as the program performance has improved. In the U.S., the HECM has made itself less relevant.

Nunes: How has the private sector responded?

Mayer: We’ve been developing and securitizing proprietary products, and the securitization execution is improving. We will probably have as many as six or eight this year, and completed seven securitizations in 2024 and 2025. AAA spreads on every one of those has traded the same or better than it did before.

After you do that for a couple of years, you start to have a lower cost of capital. That’s allowed us and other companies coming into the business to have a higher loan-to-value ratio. Borrowers like to be able to pull more proceeds.

Our Platinum Peak product can offer 15% to 25% more proceeds than a HECM, depending on the 10-year Treasury rate. For people in their 60s, it can be even more, maybe up to 30% more proceeds. The upfront cost is lower and the interest rate is higher. Many borrowers would take the trade, which is basically, ‘I’m willing to pay a higher interest rate if I can get a bunch more money.’

Nunes: How have proprietary products evolved over time?

Mayer: The initial set of proprietary products were predominantly about situations where you couldn’t get a HECM. The initial round was jumbo programs — houses that today would be at or above about $1.3 million — and then condominiums, for example, that don’t qualify for Federal Housing Administration insurance but might be Fannie Mae– and Freddie Mac-eligible.

As that market started to grow, people started to offer products that would be competitive with — and better than — the HECM. The first real innovation there was our Platinum Peak product, a little over a year ago, where loan-to-value ratios were a little better. You might be able to get a few thousand more.

That opened up the market because borrowers who were HECM-eligible would choose a proprietary product. That was funded because securitization executions got better. Mortgage spreads in general have improved, but proprietary spreads have been improving faster than the rest of the market.

That’s allowed people to offer other enhancements. There are second-lien products, where you can take out a reverse mortgage behind a traditional first lien. You’ve also seen our Platinum Preserve product in which you can borrow against some portion — but not all — of your home. I’ll call them more niche products. 

Nunes: Is looking abroad a natural next step for finding more solutions? If so, which regions or countries do you watch most closely — and why?

Mayer: There are nascent markets in France and Italy. Sweden has a bank that offers equity release products on its balance sheet. But let me focus on the U.K., because it has a long and distinguished history in this space.

Equity release (reverse) mortgages are anywhere between 10% to 36%, depending on the year, of all mortgages originated for borrowers who are 55 and older. In the U.S, we did about $260 billion of forward mortgages to people 62 and older last year — and about $8 billion of reverse mortgages, or 3% of originations.

The U.K. market is much more mature than the U.S. market. They refer to their products as ‘later-life lending,’ reflecting the broad variety of different products that are available. And unlike in the U.S., many of the insurance companies offer products.

The presence of insurance companies really changes things. First, they have a much more robust product offering at lower interest rates that doesn’t have such a high upfront origination fee — and those products are held on insurance company balance sheets.

They don’t have rules that make it difficult for insurance companies to originate mortgages or prohibit financial planners from earning a commission — they can get paid for originating an equity release loan the same way they can for an annuity or an insurance policy.

In the U.S., you can’t get paid a commission for a mortgage, even if the mortgage is essentially serving the same purpose as one of those other financial planning products. The entire infrastructure of the system is very different, and it allows them to do things that we couldn’t do, but are getting closer to being able to do so.

Nunes: Who are these products designed for and who is actually using them?

Mayer: Both the U.S. and the U.K. serve a market of needs-based borrowers who have an existing mortgage and are struggling to make the payments. They don’t have enough saved in retirement. Home equity is a large share of their net worth. These are middle-class and lower-middle-class borrowers who have worked their whole lives, they’ve earned their equity, and they’re using that equity to help them retire better.

What the U.K. also has, though, are people who are thinking about financial planning and are using the home as part of financial planning. They’re able to offer products at interest rates that are notably lower than we’re able to offer, because those products are not being securitized.

They don’t have a gift tax, so you’re seeing people use money to give to the kids, financial and real estate planning, liquidity to live off to keep assets invested — more of that is happening there than is happening in the U.S. Part of it is because those borrowers don’t need the highest LTV, but they’re interest rate sensitive.

On the other side, there are people who would like to have higher LTV ratios, but they have something called Solvency II — a set of regulatory restrictions that limit the LTVs on loans for insurance companies to hold the loans on their balance sheet.

We’re actually ahead of the U.K. in terms of having securitizations to fund higher-LTV products. We range up to about 61% for an 90-year-old. For borrowers under age 70, it’ll be around the low-mid 40s.

Nunes: How easy is it for borrowers to refinance or access additional funds once they already have a loan?

Mayer: Refinancing mortgages is much more an American thing than a global thing. In some years, as much as one-third of their originations are subsequent draws on loans that were taken out several years earlier. That’s much less expensive for consumers.

Their ability to give people proceeds — not by refinancing the whole loan, but by adding tranches behind the original tranche — is a lot easier to do, because the entire loan is owned by an insurance company. You don’t have to go talk to all the bond investors and redo the securitization.

FN: What other senior-focused solutions have you seen in Europe, beyond traditional reverse mortgages?

CM: In Italy and France, they have something called a ‘viager’ where you sell your home on their equivalent of the MLS and you live in it as long as you live. These are not often sold to investors; they’re often sold to other consumers. They’re not huge, but they exist.

When the person who lives in it moves out or dies, you get the home. They literally sell the equity in their home, and there’s an amortization table for how to calculate it. Let’s say you’re living in a $500,000 home. For an 85-year-old, you give them $350,000, they live as long as they want in the home, pay all the costs, and when they die, it’s yours.

Another interesting thing that they do in the U.K. — which I just cannot imagine doing in the U.S. — is health underwriting. If you are sick, you will get more money on your reverse mortgage, because your life expectancy is shorter and therefore you can borrow more money upfront. Now these are insurance companies, so they’re used to underwriting health for life insurance. They have the skill set to do it.

FN: How are lessons from international markets — especially the U.K. — shaping the product road map at Longbridge?

CM: Longbridge offers a couple of different products, and you’re going to see us do some other things this year and next year that are tied into ideas over in the U.K.

One of the things that I admire a lot about the U.K. market is the diversity of funding sources that allow them to do different things, but we’re well equipped in the U.S. to do some of those things with (parent company) Ellington Financial. As we move on, you’re going to start to see us do some things that are built off lessons in the U.K. — how they finance, how they think about risk and how they model out prepayments.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

John McManus: Carter, Arizona just passed House Bill 2999, which creates State Affordability Infrastructure Districts (“SAID” or “Districts”).  Why does this matter to builders and developers?

Carter Froelich: What matters most is that Arizona finally has a district financing tool that is built for the way land development actually happens. For years, Arizona has been competing with Texas, Florida, Colorado and Utah, and those states have had much more usable and efficient infrastructure finance platforms. The numbers tell the story.

From 2019 through 2025, Arizona community facilities districts (“CFD”) produced roughly $347 million in transaction volume, while Colorado metro districts produced about $11.7 billion, Texas MUDs about $8.9 billion, Florida CDDs about $8.4 billion and Utah PIDs about $4.5 billion. That financing gap is huge, and it impacts whether infrastructure gets built, whether lots are delivered and whether homebuilders can bring product to market at a price buyers can afford.

John McManus: You have said this has been a long effort for Launch. What was the history behind the bill?

Carter Froelich: Launch has been working with the private sector for close to 20 years to get better infrastructure financing legislation passed in Arizona. This was the third serious attempt, and the third time was the charm. The effort was led by representatives from the Central Arizona Home Builders Association, Valley Partnership and a number of private sector participants who understood that Arizona needed to catch up in the infrastructure financing space.

Tyler Cobb at Taft Law did an excellent job drafting the legislation, and Launch had significant input behind the scenes because we have lived with these Arizona financing structures in the field since 1991. We know where the law needs to be precise, where it needs to be flexible and where it needs to be practical.

This is also the fifth time Launch has helped write, lobby for and/or assist with legislation that improves private sector district financing around the US. We do it because our clients need tools that work, not tools that sound good in theory, and then fail when a project needs capital.

John McManus: What is the biggest practical change?

Carter Froelich: The biggest change is that a SAID is formed through an application to the Arizona Finance Authority (“Authority” or “AFA”), and local jurisdiction approval is not required. That is an extremely big deal. Historically, district finance in Arizona has often depended on city or county approval, which can bring politics, uncertainty and delay into the financing equation.

Under Arizona House Bill 2999, the Authority reviews the petition for compliance with the statute. It is a yes-or-no compliance review, not an open-ended political negotiation with the jurisdiction. That kind of predictability is important to developers and builders because time and uncertainty both show up as costs in the pro forma.

For example, I can’t make this stuff up because no one would believe me, but prior to the law change, a client and I were in year 20 of trying to set up a CFD in a suburban community north of Tucson.

John McManus: How does the District get created?

Carter Froelich: The petition has to be supported by 100% of the landowners, and the public infrastructure costs have to exceed $5 million. The District can include contiguous or noncontiguous property, which is important because real projects do not always fit snugly inside one contiguous boundary. The petition includes the finance plan, general plan, estimated costs, maximum tax rate, appraisal, bond counsel certificate, consultant list, petitioner experience, legal description, title report and other materials.

There is also notice to the jurisdiction, but the jurisdiction is not the approval body. Once the Authority has completed its review and the formation order is issued, the District can move toward bond issuance after the required steps, including the AFA submittal, a short waiting period, District hearing, the preparation of bond documents, pricing and the ultimate bond closing.

John McManus: How is the SAID governed?

Carter Froelich: The District starts with a three-member appointed board made up of fee property owners or people designated by property owners. The first board’s terms are staggered at three, four and five years, and regular terms are three years after that. Bond elections are required for GO bond authorizations and for dissolution. The qualified voters are property owners, including corporations, with voting based on acreage.

That structure makes sense because the people carrying the early development risk are the landowners, and they are the ones responsible for delivering the infrastructure. Over time, as the project builds out and ownership changes, governance naturally evolves to homeowners, similar to MUDS, metro districts and CDDs.

John McManus: What can these Districts finance?

Carter Froelich: The eligible improvements are broad public infrastructure items. SAIDs can finance water, sewer, stormwater, flood control, streets, roads, highways, bridges, parking, sidewalks, trails, pathways, bicycle facilities, equestrian routes, lighting, parks, open space, recreational facilities, public safety buildings, communications and digital infrastructure, real property, soft costs and financing costs. They can also finance rail corridors, crossings, grade separations, sidings and signalization.

Just as important, they can finance development impact fees when those fees fund public infrastructure that serves or is necessitated by development within the District. The impact fee piece is an especially important part of the legislation and will be a game changer for Arizona homebuilders both big and small.

John McManus: What kinds of bonds can be issued?

Carter Froelich: The law allows general obligation bonds, special assessment bonds and revenue bonds. The bonds are tax exempt municipal bonds, which helps lower the cost of capital compared with taxable alternatives. General obligation bonds are backed by the annual ad valorem tax, special assessment bonds are backed by special assessment liens and payments and revenue bonds are backed by dedicated revenue sources, including user fees, rates or charges for public infrastructure or services.

The point is that the District provides flexibility as well as certainty. Different projects need different financing structures. A master planned community, an industrial project, a mixed-use project and a residential subdivision may all have different infrastructure burdens and different repayment profiles. 

John McManus: What should the industry take away from this?

Carter Froelich: The takeaway is that Arizona now has a serious financing tool to deliver public infrastructure, lots and homes. This is not a silver bullet, and it will not fit every project. But for projects with meaningful public infrastructure costs, impact fees, rail or transportation needs, it should be evaluated early. Infrastructure finance should be part of the land strategy, the entitlement strategy and the capital strategy from the beginning.

John McManus: Final thought?

Carter Froelich: Arizona is and will remain a growth state, but providing for growth is more complicated and more expensive than any time in our history. If we want jobs, housing and economic development, we have to have better and more cost-effective ways to pay for the public infrastructure that supports growth and housing.

The SAID Act is a major step in that direction. For Launch, this is exactly the kind of financing structure we believe in. This bill gives Arizona a better chance to compete, and more importantly, it gives our clients another way to turn land into lots.

Click Here

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The real estate industry isn’t short on data or knowledge. The housing market has never been better documented. The gap is translation, turning insight into action.

Real-time inventory, weekly market reports, rate analysis, transaction trends. The intelligence available to housing professionals today is extraordinary. But information needs vary widely across roles, and what moves an executive isn’t what moves a loan officer or a builder.

HousingWire is built around that gap. More clarity and better decisions, faster.

The challenge for the working real estate agent isn’t access to intelligence. It’s knowing what to do with it. Taking what the data actually says about their local market, at this moment, for this client, and turning it into a conversation that moves someone from uncertainty to decision.

Millions of buyers are sitting on the sidelines. Not because information doesn’t exist. Because nobody has translated it for them. That uncertainty costs agents real business and relationships that never get started.

Keeping Current Matters (KCM) exists to help agents close that gap. That’s why we acquired this business and welcomed the KCM team into HousingWire.

What KCM does

KCM has spent years doing the hard work that most agents don’t have time to do: curating the best available market intelligence and translating it into clear, compelling, ready-to-use content that agents can put in front of clients immediately. Presentations, charts, scripts, social content, listing appointment tools — everything designed to help an agent walk into a room, explain the market with confidence and help a homebuyer or seller make a decision.

The core insight behind KCM is that fear is the primary driver of housing market indecision. The antidote to fear isn’t more data. It’s the right data, explained clearly, at the right moment. Agents who can do that consistently win more listings, close more transactions and build deeper client relationships. KCM is what makes that possible at scale.

Why this fits our strategy

HousingWire is organized into two groups. HousingWire Information Services covers media, data, events and awards — our intelligence layer producing and distributing authoritative analysis of everything that moves in housing. HousingWire Solutions — Altos Research, RealTrends and now KCM — is our action layer, purpose-built tools that help housing professionals turn knowledge into revenue.

Altos already plays this role for agents and brokers who need real-time local market data to win listing appointments, set accurate pricing and advise clients with confidence. Agents who walk into a listing appointment with Altos data don’t just look prepared; they are prepared, with current inventory levels, days-on-market trends and pricing dynamics specific to the neighborhood they’re working in. That data wins business.

KCM extends that capability into the full client communication cycle. Where Altos gives agents the local intelligence, KCM gives them the tools to activate it, turning market data into presentations, scripts and content that connect with buyers and sellers and move them toward decisions. For an agent, that combination means more listings, more conversions and more closed transactions.

What we’re building

KCM Local, already powered by HousingWire data, brings neighborhood-level market intelligence directly into the presentations and scripts agents use every day. The next phase extends that further with hyper-local, AI-generated content assets built on Altos data feeds, delivered automatically across social, email, video and CRM.

An agent in Phoenix gets content specific to their neighborhood this week, ready to send. An agent in Charlotte gets the same. Not national narratives with local names swapped in but genuinely local content, grounded in real market data, at a level of specificity that makes an agent the most informed person in the room. That connects directly to agent revenue through better conversations that lead to more signed agreements.

The market context

Real estate agents are operating in one of the most challenging environments in a generation. Low inventory, evolving commission structures and rising client expectations around agent expertise and value. 

The agents who win in that environment are the ones who show up prepared, communicate confidently and help clients work through the fear and uncertainty that keeps them from making decisions. That’s not a content problem. It’s a revenue problem, and the solution is better intelligence, better translated, closer to the moment it matters.

Where we go from here

At HousingWire and KCM, the second half of 2026 is about integration and acceleration. Deepening the Altos data layer across KCM’s content engine, building the enterprise channel for teams and brokerages who want this capability deployed across their entire agent roster, and continuing the product development work the KCM team has been executing consistently.

If you’re an agent or team leader ready to put better market intelligence to work, or a brokerage or enterprise partner who wants to explore what this looks like at scale, reach out.

By Clayton Collins, CEO, HousingWire

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Oil prices are under $69 while mortgage rates are near yearly highs. For some observers that might seem very odd, but for me it makes sense. During the Iran conflict, the Federal Reserve went from talking about two to three rate cuts to two to three rate hikes. Oil prices falling from over $100 to under $69 is very important, but today I want to focus on the shift in Fed policy and why this chart below hasn’t helped mortgage rates as much as people were hoping for.

chart visualization

I talked about why mortgage rates haven’t fallen much with oil prices in this article and on this episode of the HousingWire Daily podcast. However, since that article, we have had some material changes to the rate outlook.

Fed hawks run the show for now

We have heard from two Federal Reserve hawks this week. Minneapolis Fed President Neil Kashkari said he has penciled in one rate hike for 2026. Meanwhile, in an interview on CNBC on Tuesday, Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack was not only hawkish, but said lower oil prices can be a problem for inflation, as lower gas prices will be a plus for the economy.

In addition, Hammack acknowledged that the Fed is too restrictive for housing, but said the Fed can’t do anything for housing because of the mortgage rate lockdown, something I discussed on this podcast.

Remember that we went into 2026 thinking we were getting two to three rate cuts. Now the hawks are in charge and they’re pushing for rate hikes, and so far, oil prices falling hasn’t changed their view since the last Fed meeting.

chart visualization

For mortgage rates to fall, the market needs to see that we have more doves against rate hikes versus hawks, and the Fed meeting in July will be a doozy because a lot of Fed hawks made their stance about oil, and this is the first meeting where the doves and hawks can fight it out. For his part, Fed Chair Kevin Warsh made remarks today about how inflation expectations and risk have been falling. However, he is just one person and not part of the Federal Reserve hawk crew that penciled in more rate hikes.

At this point it’s hawks 2-doves 0 because we haven’t heard from certain hawks who might have changed their mind since oil prices have crashed.

For now, treat that 4.46%-4.48% level on the 10-year yield as the base for the hawkish Fed. I believe 65%-75% of where we see the 10-year yield and mortgage rates is driven by Fed policy, and it has shifted significantly from the start of the year to today.

Think of the mortgage rate base at 6.50%-6.75%, and with better-than-expected inflation news, more doves or softer labor data, 6.25% should be a realistic target for the rest of the year.

We have the jobs report tomorrow, which will be a good test of how the bond market will react to positive or negative data.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Finding an apartment is getting a little more expensive again this summer, but renters are still in a better position than they were a year ago thanks to a record wave of new construction that continues to keep prices in check.

According to Apartment List’s July National Rent Report, released this week, the national median rent rose 0.4% in June to $1,385 per month, marking the fifth consecutive monthly increase. The report says the gain is typical for the busy summer moving season, when demand rises and landlords generally have greater pricing power.

Even so, the broader trend remains favorable for renters.

National median rent is still 1.2% lower than it was in June 2025, a decline of roughly $17 per month, and remains 4% below its mid-2022 peak, or about $57 less. Despite that easing, rents are still approximately 21% higher than they were at the start of 2021, reflecting the lasting impact of the pandemic housing boom.

The biggest reason prices have remained relatively soft is supply.

The apartment construction boom peaked in 2024, when developers delivered more than 600,000 new apartments in large multifamily buildings—the highest annual total since 1986. That unprecedented surge gave renters more choices and forced landlords to compete more aggressively for tenants.

Now the market is beginning to tighten.

Apartment List said the national multifamily vacancy rate stands at 7.2%. Vacancy reached a record high in February but has started to decline for the first time in more than four years, suggesting the large inventory of newly completed apartments is gradually being absorbed.

Apartments are also leasing a bit faster. Properties are now spending about 30 days on the market, one day less than in May.

The report also found that annual rent growth has improved for two straight months after reaching its weakest level on record in April, based on Apartment List’s data dating back to 2017. While rents remain lower than a year ago, those year-over-year declines are becoming smaller.

Housing conditions continue to vary widely across the country.

Among major metropolitan areas, San Antonio now has the softest rental market, with median rents down 5% from a year ago as Texas continues adding new apartment supply. Austin follows closely with rents down 4.3%.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, San Francisco recorded the strongest annual increase, with median rents rising 7.4% over the past year.

The regional differences reflect where builders have been most active.

Most of the annual rent declines are concentrated across the South and Mountain West, while much of the Northeast, Midwest, and parts of the West Coast continue seeing rent increases.

Among the nation’s 56 metropolitan areas with more than one million residents, 30 posted lower rents than a year ago, but 51 experienced month-over-month increases during June, highlighting the normal seasonal strength in the rental market.

The report also carries broader economic implications.

Housing remains one of the largest monthly expenses for American households and is a major component of inflation. Slower rent growth helps reduce pressure on consumers while also easing one of the Federal Reserve’s most closely watched inflation measures as policymakers continue evaluating future interest-rate decisions.

The trend is equally important for apartment owners and developers.

After accelerating construction through 2023 and 2024, many builders have sharply reduced new projects. If that slowdown continues while today’s excess supply is absorbed, landlords could regain greater pricing power beginning in 2027.

For now, however, vacancy rates remain elevated and the record pipeline of recently completed apartments continues to give renters more leverage than they have enjoyed in several years.

The bottom line is that rents are following their normal summer pattern by moving higher, but the largest apartment-building boom in decades has prevented another major surge in housing costs. How long that continues will depend on how quickly today’s supply is absorbed—and how much developers slow future construction.

JBizNews Desk | Washington

© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or distribution without written permission is prohibited.

On:

Earlier this week, the City of Cleveland and Cleveland’s Site Readiness for Good Jobs Fund announced that UK-based MMY was selected as the City’s preferred modular housing manufacturer, following the award of $2.56 million to support the construction of a new modular housing factory.

The news mirrors a larger trend taking shape nationwide. As local and state governments embrace modular housing as one of many solutions to their housing shortfalls, many are willing to put their money where their mouth is and provide financial support for modular manufacturing facilities in an effort to stimulate more housing production.

The funding for the Cleveland project, which comes in the form of Ohio Historic Preservation Tax Credits, will aid in the redevelopment of the Wellman-Seaver-Morgan Engineering Company building, a historic property located in an underserved area of the city. 

The Cleveland redevelopment

The 185,000-square-foot building, constructed in 1901, has fallen into deep disrepair after being mostly abandoned over the last few decades. Originally used to build ore unloaders, the building will soon serve as a key piece of Cleveland’s housing and economic development strategy. 

MMY is still lining up some of the remaining financing for the estimated $26 million redevelopment project. The builder’s CEO, Robin Bartram-Brown, told HousingWire TBD that financial support from the city and state is crucial to getting a project like this up and running, as the building needs a lot of investment. 

“This is a significant historical building in Cleveland, and the intent of the Site Readiness Fund and of the mayor was always to keep it, but that means that you need a lot of help to be able to do that,” Bartram-Brown said. “It’s a very complex capital stack to bring this building back to life.”

The factory, part of a 350-acre redevelopment initiative called The Midline, is expected to create more than 150 jobs. Beyond that, the facility, at full buildout, would have the capacity to deliver three homes a day, predominantly single-family homes in and around Cleveland. 

The MMY factory, Bartram-Brown said, will feature three production lines aimed at vertically integrating the homebuilding process: a modular housing assembly line, a sub-assembly line that manufactures housing components and a precast foundation line that produces foundation systems.

A broader national trend

This isn’t MMY’s first project in the United States. In 2024, the City of Louisville awarded the company a $500,000 grant and a subsequent $1.2 million in additional funding to develop a modular housing factory in the city. The roughly 100,000-square-foot facility could ultimately build up to 500 housing units per year, according to an announcement from the City of Louisville. 

Elsewhere in the country, many other local and state governments have provided grants, loans, tax incentives and other forms of financial support to help launch modular housing factories.

For example, in March of this year, Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker unveiled a proposed 2027 city budget that would designate $10 million to lure a modular factory into the City of Philadelphia. The proposed funding, part of the mayor’s plan to build 30,000 housing units by 2028, signals that city officials see modular housing as a critical component of their effort to deliver 30,000 new housing units by 2028.

There are other examples from Colorado, where harsh winters, especially in high-altitude mountain communities, can disrupt traditional construction. To mitigate those challenges, state officials have prioritized modular housing as a way to maintain year-round building activity.

In recent years, Colorado has provided millions of dollars to finance the construction of modular housing factories across the state. In 2024 alone, the state awarded grants totalling $9.6 million and low-cost loans totalling $38 million to spur the construction of modular housing facilities statewide. 

One such facility is a new 140,000-square-foot factory in Aurora, CO. Vederra Modular received $6 million in loans and lines of credit from the state to build the facility, which is expected to produce between 500,000 and 650,000 square feet of housing per year. 

Elsewhere in Colorado, the City of Boulder built and now owns a 31,375-square-foot modular housing factory. Flatirons Habitat for Humanity operates the facility in partnership with the local school district. The factory, which builds 1,150-square-foot, three-bedroom net-zero duplex homes, is expected to boost Habitat’s housing production from just three to four homes per year to as many as 50 homes annually. 

Yet another example comes from New England. In 2024, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, a regional planning agency in Greater Boston, $3 million to help plan for a new modular construction facility in the region. 

Taken together, these types of public investments suggest that policymakers in various states and cities throughout the country view modular housing as a worthwhile investment. As the national chronic housing shortage persists, many local governments are betting that expanding modular manufacturing capacity can help boost long-term housing production.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Existing home sales were still positive year over year last week, with our weekly pending home sales data holding steady even with elevated mortgage rates. While people are frustrated that lower oil prices haven’t brought rates down, they should be deeply grateful that improved mortgage spreads have helped housing growth in 2026. If this had been 2023, 2024 or even 2025, mortgage rates would have been over 7% for most of the year and housing demand tends to soften when that happens. 

In fact, that has been the reason why we can’t get traction on home sales, as the rate volatility from 2023-2025 kept home sales from growing, but not in 2026! In the past, existing home sales would get some traction with rates near 6%, only to lose it when rates popped over 7%. This year, we haven’t had to experience that, even with a hawkish Federal Reserve, oil prices over $100 and inflation above target. So, wow, yes, hug a mortgage spread folks.

Mortgage spreads

Since late 2022, housing demand has tended to perform better when mortgage rates fall below 6.64% and head toward 6%. We don’t need 3%, 4%,or even 5% rates to grow sales — rates near 6% work, mostly because we are working from record-low levels. However, mortgage spreads widened in 2023 to over 3%, which is very rare post-1986.  

Over time, as a rate-cut cycle starts, spreads historically improve, which is why, in 2026, my peak mortgage rate forecast was 6.75%, solely due to spreads getting closer to normal. For the most part, mortgage rates have been below 6.64%.

Historically, mortgage spreads have ranged from 1.60% to 1.80%. Last week, spreads were at 2.01%, down from 2.03% the week before.

Let’s compare last week’s mortgage rates to where they would have been over the last three years, given the 10-year yield’s current level:

  • If we had the worst mortgage spread levels of 2023, mortgage rates would be 7.70% today, not 6.60%.
  • If we had the worst levels of 2024, mortgage rates would be 7.32% today 
  • If we had the worst levels of 2025, mortgage rates would be 7.13% today.

10-year yield and mortgage rates

In the 2026 HousingWire forecast, I anticipated the following ranges:

  • Mortgage rates between 5.75% and 6.75%
  • The 10-year yield fluctuating between 3.80% and 4.60%

Last week was jobs week and we saw a mixed bag in the data: job openings beat estimates, ADP was a slight miss but still at elevated levels, jobless claims were low, but Jobs Friday came in at a miss of estimates and negative revisions. And yet, the 10-year yield, even with oil prices at $68, closed the week at 4.49%.

Last week I wrote about why this is happening, and Sarah and I did an important episode of the HousingWire Daily podcast on this subject, which I believe is a must-listen. My take: policy getting more restrictive has been a reason the yields like hanging out around the 4.46%-4.48% level.

The Fed meeting is a few weeks away; we need to hear some hawks turn to doves to get bond traders off the rate hike cycle mindset. Last week we had two Fed Presidents talk and Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack made it seem that lower oil prices were bad for inflation, a reason why yields stayed firm.

chart visualization

Weekly pending sales

Our pending home sales data provides a week-to-week perspective, though results can be affected by holidays and short-term fluctuations. Our weekly pending sales data typically takes 30-60 days to be reflected in the sales data. 

In the next two weeks, our weekly Housing Market Tracker will be hit due to the holiday data, but as you can see below, even with rates near yearly highs, we are still showing growth year over year. 

Here are the pending sales for last week over the last two years:

  • 2026: 71,173
  • 2025: 66,967

chart visualization

Total pending home sales

I normally don’t include our weekly total pending home sales data in the tracker, but for this July 4th weekend and since we are tracking how beneficial mortgage spreads have been to home sales this year, I wanted to show more of a moving average of sales to show how important mortgage spreads have been in 2026. 

Here are the total pending sales for last week over the last two years:

  • 2026: 422,130
  • 2025: 396,652

chart visualization

Mortgage purchase application data

Purchase application data all year long has shown why mortgage spreads have been so important to housing in 2026. Every week this year — outside of two weeks which had harder year-over-year comps — has been positive year over year. Even with all the drama in 2026, mortgage spreads have kept rates below 6.75% and thus purchase apps have been positive.

chart visualization

Here are the stats on purchase apps so far in 2026

  • 11 positive week-to-week prints
  • 12 negative week-to-week prints
  • 2 flat week-to-week prints
  • 10 weeks of double-digit year-over-year growth
  • 23 weeks of positive year-over-year growth
  • 2 negative year-over-year prints

Housing inventory

A lot of people are surprised that inventory growth has slowed down and we have had some negative year-over-year data in recent weeks. But this isn’t shocking to our readers and those that listen to our podcast.

However, now the low bar comps are done with and we need to follow the data more closely to see where the next direction is. The most important aspect of inventory is that we are at healthier levels in 2026 than what we saw in 2020-2023, which is why we are chipping away at making housing more affordable. 

  • Weekly inventory change:(June 26-July 3): Inventory rose from to 841,547 to 852,241   
  • Same week last year: (June 27-July 4): Inventory rose from 831,050 to 853,160

chart visualization

New listings

Seasonality in the new listings data is here; we are now starting the traditional decline. Traditionally, we would see 80,000-100,000 new listings during the seasonal peak weeks, but we’ve only cracked above 80,000 four times this year and never in back-to-back weeks. Still, both 2025 and 2026 new listing data is better than what we saw in 2023 and 2024. This year we just had a tad bit more demand than last year to start the year off.

In any case, the seasonal decline is with us now, but 2026 has not been a bad year for new listings: better mortgage spreads made more sellers ready to sell and buy. 

Some context for those who believe that the new listings data resembles the housing bubble years: new listings during that time ranged from 250,000 to 400,000 per week for several years. Several years!

Here is last week’s new listings data for the past two years:

  • 2026: 75,360
  • 2025:  69,701

chart visualization

Price-cut percentage

Typically, about one-third of homes undergo price reductions before they sell, reflecting the dynamic nature of the housing market. For the most part, price-cut percentages this year have been lower than last year.

In my 2026 home-price forecast, I had a negative 0.62% call for the year nationally. Home-price growth really isn’t going anywhere this year, but the percentage of price cuts has been lower year over year for most of 2026.  My forecast of negative -0.62% might be hard to achieve: even though home-price growth isn’t positive by much this year, it is still positive.

The price-cut percentage for last week:

  • 2026: 39.54%
  • 2025: 41%

chart visualization

The week ahead: Existing home sales, bond auctions and Fed speeches

Existing home sales will be reported this week and we will have easy year-over-year comps for growth. After this month is when home sales started to pick up last year so the comps will be more difficult to show growth for the rest of the year, especially in December.

We will also have some bond auctions this week and Dallas Fed President Lorie Logan will be speaking. Logan is one of the Fed hawks and the markets will be waiting to hear what she says now, because oil prices have fallen. It will be an interesting week with bond trading and mortgage rates.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The second and final day of the hearing regarding Zillow’s preliminary injunction motion in its ongoing antitrust lawsuit against Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) and Compass International Holdings featured testimony from two key witnesses for the defense, Compass CEO Robert Reffkin and MRED CEO Rebecca Jensen. 

During their times on the witness stand on Thursday, Reffkin and Jensen both testified that executives at Zillow threatened them regarding their respective firms’ resistance to Zillow’s listing access standards policy, which bans listings from Zillow that are not available for display on IDX or VOW feed powered websites within one business day of the property being publicly marketed. 

The lawsuit focused on whether MRED can suspend its IDX and VOW listing data feeds to Zillow if the listing portal filters or suppresses certain listings and whether Compass unlawfully pushed MRED to do so. 

Let’s play telephone

In her testimony, Jensen detailed calls with Zillow executives, including Zillow’s chief industry development officer Errol Samuelson and the firm’s vice president of enterprise sales and industry at Showingtime+ Michael Lane. According to Jensen, both calls occurred in October 2025.

In the call with Lane, he told Jensen that he regretted using MRED’s private listing network, which has existed since 2016, to sell his Chicagoland area home. Lane allegedly argued that the network raised fair housing concerns. Jensen said she defended the network by citing research and examples of sellers facing sensitive personal circumstances, arguing it exists to give sellers flexibility during difficult times, while acknowledging they ultimately disagreed over whether the network should continue.

In a separate call with Samuelson, Jensen said the Zillow executive asked if she would consider having MRED’s private listings delayed on Zillow, which she declined citing the 2008 settlement between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the National Association of Realtors (NAR), that prevented MLSs from selectively hiding listings from consumer-facing web portals. The terms of this settlement expired in November 2018. 

According to Jensen, when she refused to comply with Zillow’s request, Samuelson told her that she was leaving “no choice for Zillow than to litigate.” Jensen told the court that Samuelson told her she should expect her “phone to be dumped and all of [her] text messages to get out and have millions of dollars spent on litigation, and that [she was] going to have a public spectacle.” 

Learning from the past

On the stand, Jensen explained her strong desire to not acquiesce to Zillow’s request came from her experience in the real estate industry dealing with the DOJ lawsuit that resulted in the 2008 settlement, and if faced with potentially contending with a lawsuit from the DOJ or Zillow, she would rather deal with Zillow. Jensen also testified that the “objective criteria” defined in MRED’s IDX display rule, which is the policy at the center of this lawsuit, are a result of the 2008 settlement.

Over the course of the hearing, MRED’s witnesses argued that the MLS simply clarified these objective criteria in its October update and did not change them at the behest of Compass, as Zillow has claimed. Additionally, Jensen told the court that MRED has always been focused on growing its footprint and expanding nationally since she started at the MLS in 2015, claiming that this was not a new desire brought about by an alleged conspiracy with Compass. 

In an emailed statement, an MRED spokesperson told HousingWire that the lawsuit is “just a breach of contract case, not an antitrust conspiracy.” 

“MRED is enforcing a neutral rule designed to maintain data integrity between brokerages and preserve the viability of MLSs as valuable services in the real estate industry,” the spokesperson added. “Zillow’s purported harm is entirely self-inflicted and can be remedied immediately by simply complying with the same clear and longstanding license agreement terms that Zillow has complied with for years.”

Robert Reffkin takes the stand

During Reffkin’s time on the witness stand he faced screenshots of his own texts and emails presented to him by Zillow’s counsel during his cross examination. Earlier in his testimony, Reffkin had said that he rarely communicated with Jensen and could not recall sharing litigation documents with her. However, the evidence Zillow presented to the court showed a text exchange from November 2025 in which Reffkin sent a Zillow document from an earlier court filing marked “highly confidential” and “outside counsel’s eyes only,” followed by an exchange in which Jensen asked whether she could forward the documents to the Illinois attorney general and reporters. 

Through this communication, as well as other examples of conversations between Compass and executives at other MLSs, including Bright MLS,  Zillow attempted to show the court how MRED and Compass allegedly conspired to harm the listing portal. 

“A conspiracy between Compass and MRED to undermine Zillow’s pro-consumer listing standards came into clear view over two days of testimony in federal court in Chicago. Key witness testimony from Compass and MRED executives was repeatedly contradicted by texts, emails, internal documents and previous statements introduced in court,” a Zillow spokesperson told HousingWire in an emailed statement.

“The conduct at the center of this case is not limited to Chicago, but a test of whether this playbook can become a national template for hiding homes that can be replicated in market after market. If so, that could spell the end of the open, transparent housing system that benefits buyers, sellers and agents nationwide. We are pleased the truth is out.” 

Compass did not immediately return HousingWire’s request for comment on the conclusion of the hearing. 

What comes next

Post-hearing briefs from both sides are due July 9, with responses due July 13. In order to be granted a preliminary injunction, Zillow needs to have proven to the court that it would be irreparably harmed without it and that it is likely to prevail if that lawsuit goes to trial.

If the motion is denied, that would mean that Zillow was unable to meet this burden, indicating that there is a chance the defendants prevail in a trial, if Zillow does not provide stronger arguments and evidence. 

A ruling on the motion could take weeks if not months. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

A two-day hearing regarding Zillow’s preliminary injunction motion in its ongoing antitrust battle with Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) and Compass International Holdings kicked off Wednesday morning in federal court in Chicago. 

The hearing is focused on a motion Zillow filed in mid-May seeking to prevent the Chicagoland MLS from terminating its listing feed sent to Zillow. Just days after this motion was filed, MRED cut off Zillow’s access to its listing feed after the portal allegedly refused to cure what the MLS calls a “material breach” of its license agreements. The feed was restored a few days later after Judge John Tharp, Jr. granted Zillow a temporary restraining order (TRO).

In early June, Judge Tharp extended the TRO, which also prevents Zillow from banning any MRED listings from its site, until the court either rules on Zillow’s preliminary injunction motion or grants MRED’s motion to compel arbitration, which is also currently pending.

The hearing is proceeding as scheduled despite an attempt by MRED earlier this week to have the court deny Zillow’s motion prior to the start of the hearing, seeking a stay on all arbitratable matters and claiming that the injunction is unnecessary given the TRO currently in place. 

Wednesday morning’s proceedings included opening statements by all three parties and the beginning of Errol Samuelson’s, Zillow’s chief industry development officer, testimony.

Other executives expected to testify at the hearing include MRED’s managing director and chief technology officer Chris Haran, Compass regional vice president Fran Broude, Zillow’s chief financial officer Jeremy Hoffman, the broker-owner of McColly Real Estate Ron McColly, Compass CEO Robert Reffkin and MRED CEO Rebecca Jensen. In addition, there will be two expert witnesses, Lawrence Wu, the president of NERA Economic Consulting, and attorney Debra Aron, who is the vice president of Charles River Associates’ Competition Practice. 

The Zillow-Compass-MRED saga

The hearing is just one part of an antitrust lawsuit Zillow filed in mid-May, claiming that MRED and Compass conspired to withhold listing data and pressure Zillow to carry private “hidden” listings nationwide.

Zillow is arguing that MRED’s October 2025 clarification of its IDX and VOW rules to state that IDX participants may filter listings only using objective criteria, such as geography, price, property type and listing type were part of a concerted effort by the MLS and Compass to harm Zillow for its listing access standards policy, which bans listings that are publicly marketed for more than one business day prior to being available to display on IDX or VOW-powered websites. 

Courtroom action

According to sources in the courtroom Wednesday morning, in opening statements, Zillow’s counsel discussed an alleged coordinated effort by Compass and MRE to hide homes from consumers and that Compass pressured MRED to prevent Zillow from enforcing its listing access standards policy. The listing portal giant also argued that hiding listings from Zillow, the nation’s largest home search portal, harms buyers and sellers and could have an impact on housing affordability and availability. 

Sources told HousingWire that counsel for Compass and MRED claimed that Zillow’s listing access standards policy is solely focused on maintaining Zillow’s user traffic and not about market transparency and that the MLS is neutral industry infrastructure.

Counsel for MRED noted that Zillow would be able to maintain its access to MRED’s IDX listing feed if it did not enforce its listing access standards policy. The MLS’s attorney also contended that Zillow is challenging the rule because it conflicts with Zillow’s business model, and said MRED’s role is to distribute listings fairly rather than favor any one company.

As for Errol Samuelson’s testimony, a Zillow spokesperson told HousingWire that much of the testimony focused on the impact of private listing networks on buyers, sellers, agents, most brokers and the market at large. According to the spokesperson, Samuelson argued that Compass’s private listings are “false private” because they’re available for anyone to see as long as they work with a Compass agent, making it not about privacy for the seller at all.

During his time on the stand, the spokesperson said Samuelson drew a key distinction between truly private listings — which Zillow does not object to — and Compass’s “black box” Phase 1 of its three-phased marketing strategy, which publicly advertises the existence of off-market homes to allegedly lure buyers into Compass offices. 

“I cannot see those listings without in some way working with a Compass agent,” the spokesperson quotes Samuelson as saying, arguing that using private listings as a marketing hook to capture buyers is what makes Compass’s model harmful to competition and sellers alike. 

Additionally, the spokesperson said Samuelson noted that Zillow has been able to enforce its listing access standards policy everywhere else without any other MLSs cutting off its IDX feed, which Samuelson argued was evidence of MRED taking these actions on behalf of Compass. 

While no other MLS has actually shut off Zillow’s listing feed, Nashville-based MLS Realtracs had threatened to suspend Zillow’s feed if the listing portal failed to comply with the MLS’s updated IDX display rules. As of June 8, 2026, Realtracs had decided to continue distributing listings to Zillow while the two parties engaged in continued contract negotiations. 

Like MRED, Realtracs announced plans to expand nationwide after securing national listing feed agreements with Compass, as well as with United Real Estate.

Expected arguments

Prior to the start of the hearing, a Compass spokesperson told HousingWire that his firm is planning on arguing that Zillow, unlike licensed brokerages, does not compete for listings or owe fiduciary duties to consumers, yet is using its dominant home search platform to dictate how brokers market properties and restrict seller choice.

The company contends that Zillow’s Listing Access Standards harm consumers by penalizing sellers who choose lawful phased marketing strategies, hiding active MLS listings from buyers without clear disclosure, and undermining MRED’s long-standing Private Listing Network. Compass also plans to argue that Zillow profits from broker-created listing data while applying its policy inconsistently and using its market power to entrench its dominance rather than promote transparency.

“Zillow says that consumers deserve to see the full market. But it is both banning active, publicly available MLS listings from its platform and deceiving consumers by labeling those listings as not for sale,” the spokesperson said. “If Zillow were genuinely committed to transparency, every MLS listing would appear on Zillow without the deceptive features it adds.” 

In a post on its Front Porch blog prior to the start of the hearing, Zillow said that in court it would “present evidence regarding MRED and Compass conspiring to cut off Zillow’s listing feed in violation of federal antitrust law, among other allegations of wrongdoing.”

“And we will present evidence that MRED and Compass did it not to protect consumers or set neutral MLS policy, but to advance Compass’ private listing business at the expense of consumers and other MRED member brokers,” the post states.

MRED did not immediately respond to HousingWire’s request for comments regarding the start of the hearing.

Next steps

Although the court’s ruling from this hearing only pertains to Zillow’s preliminary injunction motion, a ruling could provide some insight as to which way Judge Tharp is leaning in the overall case, as part of the criteria to be awarded a preliminary injunction, Zillow must show that it is likely to prevail at trial. If the motion is denied, that would mean that Zillow was unable to meet this burden, indicating that there is a chance the defendants prevail in a trial, if Zillow does not provide stronger arguments and evidence. 

All parties must file any post-hearing briefs by July 9 and any replies to the post-hearing briefs are due by July 13. After this Judge Tharp will rule on the motion. However the ruling may take at least a few weeks if not months. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

While the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act remains in Oval Office big yawn limbo, its game-changing relevance to multifamily developers, apartment builders, rental housing investors and capital providers is clear.

The bill has passed both chambers of Congress by historic bipartisan margins. What it has not yet done is become law.

That leaves four live possibilities. President Trump could sign it. He could veto it, forcing Congress to decide whether to override. He could do nothing for 10 days, excluding Sundays, while Congress remains in session, in which case the bill becomes law without his signature. Or, if Congress adjourns in a way that prevents the bill from being returned during that 10-day window, the bill could die by pocket veto.

Pocket veto, lightning round: The Constitution gives the President 10 days, excluding Sundays, to sign or return a bill. If he does neither while Congress is available to receive a veto, the bill becomes law. If Congress adjourns and prevents return of the bill, the President can effectively kill it by taking no action. That is the pocket veto. It cannot be overridden because there is no formal veto message for Congress to act on.

In practice, Congress often avoids this outcome by staying technically available through pro forma sessions or designating agents to receive veto messages.

Is ROAD, then, likely to perish in the pocket?

Probably not, unless congressional leaders allow the calendar and adjournment mechanics to produce that outcome. Given the overwhelming House and Senate vote counts, the stronger working assumption for business leaders remains that the bill either becomes law or, if vetoed, triggers a politically charged override fight.

That is enough reason to keep reading the ROAD Act as a business inflection document. Forget the political theater aspect for the moment. For multifamily, the central question is whether the bill’s red-tape provisions reach the cost centers that actually determine whether a rental development pencils.

The 40.6% bright line challenge

Single-family builders have their own regulatory-cost burden. Multifamily developers carry an even more complicated one.

A 2022 NAHB/NMHC analysis found that regulation imposed by all levels of government accounted for an average of 40.6% of multifamily development costs. That burden included zoning approval, site-work fees and studies, development requirements beyond ordinary practice, land dedication, building authorization fees, affordability mandates, building-code changes, labor rules and delay.

Here’s how that looks in a stack.

The largest single component was changes to building codes over the prior 10 years, at 11.1% of total development cost. Costs when site work begins – including fees, required studies, and related items – increased by 8.5%. Development requirements beyond ordinary practice added 5.4%. Fees charged when construction is authorized added 4.4%. Zoning approval added 3.2%. Affordability mandates added 2.7%.

Those numbers clarify where the ROAD Act merges into opportunity lanes to bend cost barriers and where it forks off in directions that cannot affect those barriers.

Multifamily affordability is not simply a rent-versus-income problem. It is a feasibility problem. Each additional development cost requires higher rents, more subsidy, more density, lower land costs, cheaper capital or a developer willing to accept a thinner return. When too many of those inputs move in the wrong direction, the project is not value-engineered. It is canceled.

Julie Smith, chief administrative officer of The Bozzuto Group, captured that operating reality in testimony before the House Financial Services Committee late last year. She said barriers to development, high construction and operating costs, and regulatory burdens make it difficult, if not impossible, for developers to help address the housing shortage. She also highlighted the need for 4.3 million new apartment homes by 2035.

That is the backdrop against which ROAD should be measured, not by how many times it says the word affordability. By whether it changes feasibility.

Where ROAD could matter most

The bill’s multifamily impact appears strongest in four areas.

FHA multifamily finance

ROAD raises outdated FHA-insured multifamily loan limits and indexes them to a multifamily construction cost measure going forward. That is not a slogan. That is underwriting machinery.

For developers working in cost-heavy markets, loan caps that do not reflect current construction economics can subtly or not so subtly block projects that otherwise meet demand. Updating those limits will not fix zoning, labor, insurance, or property taxes. But it can improve some apartment projects’ ability to access federal credit support at a moment when capital costs remain a choke point.

Environmental review

ROAD establishes categorical exemptions for certain HOME-assisted activities, including infill housing projects, affordable-housing acquisition and rehabilitation, and new construction projects with 15 or fewer units. It also directs HUD to reduce duplicative reviews when a project’s scope, scale and location remain substantially unchanged.

This is meaningful. Multifamily development is a calendar-sensitive business. Delay is not just delay. It is interest carry, construction-cost exposure, expiring financing terms, entitlement risk, and investor patience.

CDBG and HOME flexibility

ROAD would allow Community Development Block Grant funds to be used for new construction of affordable housing, subject to limits, and would require grantees to maintain public databases of undeveloped public land. It also creates grants for planning and implementation associated with affordable housing, including zoning-code updates, housing plans, inspection capacity, and efforts to reduce barriers to housing supply elasticity.

That is not the same as forcing local governments to approve apartment projects. But it does turn some federal housing and community-development money toward supply-oriented activity rather than only downstream mitigation of scarcity.

Land-use transparency and pressure

ROAD requires certain jurisdictions to report whether they have adopted or plan to adopt land-use policies such as expanding by-right multifamily zoning, allowing apartments in retail or office zones, creating transit-oriented development zones, shortening permitting timelines, reducing parking requirements, allowing office-to-apartment conversions, increasing floor-area ratios, relaxing height limits and using property-tax abatements to enable higher-density and mixed-income communities.

For apartment developers, that roster of requirements reads like a catalog of levers for project feasibility. The big catch is that submitting those reports is not binding. The information cannot be used as the basis for enforcement action.

That makes this section more flashlight than hammer.

The code-cost collision

One of the more important data points for rental developers comes not from the bill itself, but from HUD’s recent look at multifamily code revisions.

HUD’s PD&R-backed research with Purdue University reviewed International Building Code revisions from 2009 to 2021 and found that specific code changes affecting a prototype three-story apartment building increased construction costs by 9.9%. Those higher costs translated into break-even rent increases ranging from $134 in Charlotte to $222 in Los Angeles for a two-bedroom unit.

Findings such as this one should reframe the policy discussion. Housing affordability debates tend to focus on zoning because zoning determines whether apartments can be built at all. But building-code changes determine how expensive they are once allowed.

That creates a difficult policy balance. Many code changes improve life safety, resilience, energy performance, durability, or long-term risk mitigation. The issue is not whether safety matters. It does.

The issue is whether policymakers are consistently measuring the affordability trade-off when they layer code changes onto a market already constrained by land cost, capital cost, labor scarcity, insurance, taxes, and local opposition.

ROAD gestures toward that issue by calling for cost-effective and appropriate building codes in its zoning-framework guidance. But guidance is not preemption, and one could argue that such guidance without teeth only intensifies frustration. Multifamily code adoption and enforcement remain fragmented across state and local systems.

So, for rental developers, this is one of the bill’s most important limitations. ROAD recognizes the code-cost problem. It does little or nothing to solve it.

Operations count as well

Multifamily housing is unlike for-sale housing in one crucial respect.

The regulatory burden does not stop when construction is finished.

The MetroSight study, “Behind the High Cost of Rent,” examines how rental housing laws affect multifamily revenue and expenses. Its conclusion is straightforward: source-of-income laws, eviction regulations and resident-screening restrictions can raise operating costs, reduce revenue, and ultimately discourage new construction or reinvestment.

Conversely, state preemption laws can reduce regulatory complexity and support operating stability.

This is not an argument that renter protections have no value. It is an argument that renter protections carry economic effects that must be weighed against the need for more supply.

Attention to this set of cost intolerances matters. Most of the ROAD bill is aimed at production, finance, planning, land use and federal process. It is less focused on post-completion operating regulation, even though operating stability is part of the capital stack. Investors underwrite not only what it costs to build, but what it will cost to operate, lease, insure, collect, maintain, and comply.

If local or state policies make apartment operations less predictable, development capital will price that risk or go elsewhere.

Roadmap, not ground-up multifamily engine

The ROAD Act could be meaningful for multifamily development. It could improve FHA financing alignment, reduce some environmental-review friction, make CDBG and HOME tools more supply-oriented, encourage public-land transparency, and create federal pressure for local land-use reform

Those are real provisions. But the bill is not a machine that’s going to start bending the cost barriers for would-be renters.

It does not directly remove rent-control regimes. It does not override local zoning. It does not force cities to reduce parking mandates or impact fees. It does not preempt local design review. It does not standardize building-code adoption. It does not eliminate NIMBY delay. It does not lower insurance premiums, property taxes, or construction labor costs.

ROAD may improve the odds that certain projects pencil. It may give pro-housing state and local officials a better federal toolkit. It may help developers point to a national bipartisan consensus that more rental housing is essential. It may turn some public funding and planning energy toward supply rather than scarcity management.

But apartment production still depends on city councils, planning boards, neighborhood politics, state preemption choices, building departments, lenders, insurers, and capital markets.

The bill points in the right direction. But will enough jurisdictions follow it?

For multifamily, the ROAD Act’s promise is not that Washington can solve the rental affordability crisis by itself. Washington can stop adding friction where it controls the process and start rewarding the places willing to remove friction where they do. That is not the end of the road. For apartment investors, developers, builders, property owners and managers, it may be the first high-occupancy lane.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Former Zillow employee Samuel James Herrera has notified a Denver-based U.S. District Court that he and his former employer are working toward a settlement in his job discrimination lawsuit. 

On Wednesday, Herrera, who calls himself “a day-one Zillow employee,” notified Judge Regina Rodriguez, who is overseeing the lawsuit in a Denver-based federal court, that the parties were working toward a settlement agreement.

According to the notice of settlement, the agreement resolves all of the claims in the case. The filing said the terms of the settlement are still being finalized. 

Parties typically file notices of settlement in a lawsuit when all or some of the plaintiff’s claims have been settled.

In his complaint, filed in September, Herrera claimed he was wrongfully terminated by Zillow in February 2024. 

During his time with the firm, Herrera claims he earned seven promotions, ultimately landing in the role of general manager of rentals, Eastern region in 2022.

At Zillow, Herrera said he was known for his “stellar performance,” which he claims continued in his final general manager role. In this role, Herrera claims he regularly exceeded his sales goals, but despite this, he says he was passed over for further promotions and held to different standards than his white colleagues. Herrera claimed that after complaining of discrimination, Zillow forced him out of the company. 

At the time of the lawsuit’s filing, Zillow told HousingWire that the claims “alleged in the complaint are inconsistent with Zillow’s culture and values, and we believe they are without merit. One of our highest priorities at Zillow is and always has been creating an environment where people do great work and treat each other with dignity and respect.” 

Additionally, the listing portal giant noted that while Zillow was founded in 2004, Herrera did not join the firm until 2010, making him a long tenured employee, but not a “day-one” employee.

Zillow did not immediately respond to HousingWire’s request for comment on the settlement. 

Editor’s note: An earlier version of this article said a settlement had been reached. The article has since been clarified to say that they parties are working toward an agreement.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Consistent growth and disciplined hiring have helped The Craig Tann Group become one of the nation’s highest-performing real estate teams.

Based in Las Vegas, the team closed just under $486 million in sales volume across 877 transaction sides last year — earning the No. 10 national ranking for sales volume and No. 3 ranking for transaction sides among mega teams on RealTrends Verified’s rankings.

The operation also finished No. 1 in Nevada for both volume and sides.

Recognition comes as founder Craig Tann continues expanding his broader real estate business. Tann launched The Craig Tann Group in 2012 before opening independent brokerage Huntington & Ellis in 2016.

Huntington & Ellis reported $1.44 billion in sales volume across 2,496 transaction sides in 2025 and has grown to 175 agents.

Despite a challenging housing market marked by elevated mortgage rates and slower sales activity in recent years, Tann detailed consistent growth in an interview with HousingWire.

“We’ve grown every year since essentially since our inception, so 10 years,” he said. “Every year we’ve seen pretty significant growth on average between like 15% to 20%. I would say it’s our hiring process and hiring standards. We do have requirements that agents have to meet every year.

“That’s also helped us attract really high-quality agents that want to be in an environment where other agents are succeeding at a high level.”

The Craig Tann Group includes 40 agents operating within Huntington & Ellis. Consistent growth has helped pave way for the opening of a second office in Henderson, Nevada.

“We’ve talked about it for the past three years, but we’ve really worked on executing the plan over the last six to eight months,” Tann said. “We technically have a second office already, but it’s right next to our main office, so it’s really just one office. We just ran out of space.”

Building a business from the ground up

Tann entered real estate more than two decades ago after receiving an opportunity from a family friend who owned a brokerage in New York.

After working there until age 21, Tann vacationed in Las Vegas and made a life-changing decision.

“I decided I was just going to pick up and move [to Las Vegas],” he said. “So, I moved out from New York by myself at 21 and then started with a big franchise brokerage and just kind of worked my way up — slowly learned the business. Then I learned how to build a team and after building the team, I wanted to take the next step and be a little bit more creative.

“I really enjoyed the marketing side of the business, and the next step for me was starting the brokerage.”

Today, Huntington & Ellis operates as an independent brokerage, something Tann believes provides a competitive advantage in a rapidly changing industry.

“In a fast-paced changing market, you know, the independents can operate more like a speedboat versus a cruise ship, so it allows us to pivot quickly,” he said. “We can take advantage of new opportunities quickly. I think that’s one of the things that agents are attracted to. We get to create the environment. It’s not set by a big corporate company. We get to create exactly how we operate.”

The brokerage also works to differentiate itself through in-house support services, including a full marketing department and staff videographers — allowing agents to focus primarily on serving clients, Tann added.

Advice for growing teams

As more agents seek to build larger teams, Tann encourages leaders to prioritize opportunity and culture over rapid expansion.

“Build a strong reputation in town, start small and only hire as needed,” he said. “I think some of the mistakes that teams make is they hire to get bigger, and they think that means more profit, and it’s actually the opposite.”

Instead, his organization adds agents only when business demand supports it while maintaining strict expectations.

“We are very picky on the agents that we feel are going to be a good culture fit, and we only hire full-time, all-in agents,” Tann said. “So, they can’t have secondary jobs and they have to be fully committed to the business.”

Las Vegas continues attracting newcomers

Looking ahead, Tann remains optimistic about the Las Vegas housing market despite affordability challenges affecting much of the country.

He points to continued investment throughout the city, including the growth of professional sports, expanding infrastructure and Nevada’s business-friendly environment.

He also said the state’s lack of an income tax continues attracting buyers from neighboring states.

“We’re definitely seeing population grow,” Tann said. “Because we’re so much more affordable than the California or Washington market, plus we’re so much more business and income friendly, it’s just helping us attract some really great growth and population.”

While higher interest rates and home prices remain headwinds, Tann believes Las Vegas continues to offer opportunities for buyers, sellers and real estate professionals alike — positioning both The Craig Tann Group and Huntington & Ellis for continued growth.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Jenni Bonura has joined Georgia-based First Multiple Listing Service (FMLS) as chief growth officer after more than 20 years in senior leadership roles at Harry Norman, REALTORS, including serving as president and CEO of brokerage, according to an announcement on Wednesday.

At Harry Norman, Bonura held multiple leadership positions before rising to president and CEO.

Her move to FMLS carries a historical connection. Harry Norman was one of eight brokers who founded FMLS in 1957, tying Bonura’s appointment back to the MLS’s origins while it works to expand its footprint and services across Georgia and the broader Southeast.

Jeremy Crawford, president and CEO of FMLS, said Bonura’s leadership background and industry relationships align with the organization’s growth plans as MLSs face rising pressure to demonstrate value amid commission litigation, changing brokerage models and increased scrutiny of data access and costs.

“Jenni’s leadership experience, industry insight, and dedication to serving real estate professionals align perfectly with the future of FMLS,” Crawford said in a statement. “As our organization continues to grow, her expertise will help guide new opportunities, strengthen relationships, and ensure we continue providing meaningful value to the brokers and agents we serve.”

At FMLS, Bonura is expected to focus on member growth, brokerage and team relationships, and the expansion of products, services and data solutions available to subscribers. 

The organization said Bonura brings a “member-focused perspective” and long-standing relationships across the real estate community, which FMLS expects will support its efforts to deliver “exceptional products, services, data solutions and support” to its subscribers in Georgia and beyond.

Crawford said the hire reflects FMLS’s continued investment in talent and its mission to help real estate professionals succeed.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Shareholders of Two Harbors Investment Corp. have approved the company’s sale to an affiliate of CrossCountry Mortgage (CCM), ending a months-long contest with rival United Wholesale Mortgage (UWM) for control of the mortgage real estate investment trust (REIT).

The virtual shareholder meeting, held Thursday morning, had been originally scheduled for May 19 and was delayed four times as Two Harbors and its suitors worked to secure support.  

Two Harbors is an MSR-focused REIT and a top servicer of conventional loans through its RoundPoint Mortgage Servicing platform. It had a $158.89 billion owned servicing portfolio as of the first quarter, per Inside Mortgage Finance. The CCM servicing book was at $202 billion, while UWM‘s was at $229.5 billion. 

“We’re excited about our strategic partnership with Two Harbors, which will bring together TWO’s best-in-class capital markets team, RoundPoint’s servicing and operational expertise, and the unmatched retail origination business we’ve built at CCM, further reinforcing our position as a one-of-one player in the mortgage industry,” a CCM spokesperson told HousingWire.

The CCM transaction offers Two Harbors investors $12 per share in cash plus a pro-rated stub dividend. Holders of Series A, Series B and Series C preferred stock will have their shares redeemed at $25 per share, plus any accumulated and unpaid dividends, in accordance with the terms of the preferred stock.

Two Harbors’ board unanimously recommended shareholders vote in favor of the CCM deal, citing the certainty of an all-cash offer and regulatory progress, including having cleared 48 of 53 required approvals. The deal remains subject to other conditions, including the receipt of the remaining state regulatory and agency approvals. It is expected to close in August 2026.

UWM put forward a competing package that included $12.50 per share in cash — or at the shareholder’s option, 2.3328 shares of UWMC stock. Two Harbors pressed UWM to provide an all-cash alternative and argued that the stock component would deliver significantly less value for investors who took the default consideration.

Based on UWMC’s Thursday opening share price of $2.26, the default stock option would have implied about $5.27 per Two Harbors share, less than half of the advertised $12.50 per-share headline price.

“This chapter of the months-long saga with Two Harbors is now closed,” a UWM spokesperson said in a statement. “Throughout this process, our offers were superior, but their board’s conduct was both inappropriate and consistent with their track record.”

The outcome caps a dispute that began in December 2025, when Two Harbors agreed to sell to UWM in an all-stock deal that would have been UWM’s first acquisition. UWM, founded in 1986 by Jeff Ishbia and led by CEO Mat Ishbia since 2013, has historically leaned on organic growth rather than mergers and acquisitions. At that point, UWM was paying about $11.94 per share.

But UWM’s share price declined, Two Harbors walked away from the UWM agreement. CCM emerged with a higher all-cash offer of $10.80 per share.

Between April and May, UWM raised its cash-and-stock proposals, but the Two Harbors board repeatedly reaffirmed its support for the CCM bid, pointing to greater regulatory certainty and the fully cash structure that ended at $12 per share. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Compass International Holdings, is rolling out its AI-powered Home Platform across its company-owned brokerage brands, marking what the company calls the largest technology deployment in residential real estate history, according to an announcement on Thursday. 

The firm said the deployment comes less than six months after it closed its merger with Anywhere Real Estate and will extend its proprietary platform to thousands of agents across its global brands.

Beginning this summer, real estate professionals affiliated with @properties, Coldwell Banker Realty, Corcoran and Sotheby’s International Realty will gain access to the technology. The platform will be branded as Home Platform, with Compass planning to extend access to its franchise network in 2027, according to the company announcement.

Unifying all the brands

Compass said unifying its brokerage brands on a single, proprietary platform is intended to support every stage of the real estate lifecycle, from winning and servicing clients to managing transactions and nurturing repeat and referral business. The company also framed the move as a way to concentrate and scale its proprietary data.

“For more than a decade, Compass has invested in building technology to help agents grow their business and create great experiences for their clients,” Ori Allon, co-founder of Compass, said in the announcement. “The true power of AI lies in the unique data and workflows that fuel it. By combining industry-leading artificial intelligence with our vast, proprietary data, Home Platform creates an advantage that cannot be replicated.”

Rory Golod, president of growth, called the rollout “the single most important innovation in our business.”

Compass said Home Platform was developed with input from thousands of real estate professionals and is continuously trained on data from exclusive inventory and agent-client interactions. The integrated suite includes things like comparative market analysis tools, the client dashboard and other well-known Compass agent tools like its marketing center, Collections and Insights. 

By deploying the platform across its expanded brokerage footprint, Compass said it is increasing the volume of unique listing inventory, client interactions and usage patterns feeding its AI models. The company argues that in a world where base AI models are broadly available, access to differentiated, proprietary data creates a structural advantage for agents who can turn those insights into pricing strategy, listing positioning and client counsel.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

As of July 1, more than 7 million federal student loan borrowers have 90 days to transition to a new repayment option as the Biden administration’s SAVE income-driven repayment plan is officially phased out.

The program, launched in 2023 to lower monthly payments and accelerate loan forgiveness for many borrowers, is ending following a broader restructuring of the federal student loan system.

The changes stem from the Trump administration’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, enacted in 2025, and a federal court ruling in March 2026 that found the SAVE plan unconstitutional.

For the housing market, the student debt repayment overhaul could reshape mortgage affordability for millions of borrowers with student debt as they attempt to qualify for mortgages. Higher required student loan payments may reduce home purchasing power or delay homeownership for some borrowers by factoring into debt-to-income ratios.

The choice of repayment plan could also influence borrowers’ ability to qualify for a mortgage. The Pay As You Earn (PAYE) plan, which remains available until July 1, 2028, continues to cap monthly payments. Meanwhile, the Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP) bases payments on income and household size but has no maximum payment amount for higher-income borrowers.

Existing borrowers, however, will need to resume payments on a new plan in three months, on top of regular mortgage payments and other costs associated with housing.

Borrowers ‘should have planned accordingly’

Donna Schmidt, president and CEO of DLS Servicing, says that borrowers should have been prepared.

“Just like any other debt, a borrower must establish a budget to pay back borrowed funds,” Schmidt said. “While inflationary pressure had been escalating when the SAVE program was established (8% in 2022 and 4.13% in 2023), inflation rates have stabilized, dropping to 2.9% in 2024 and 2.7% in 2025. It is time to get back to regular order.”

Schmidt says that former students had “plenty of notice and should have planned accordingly.”

“From a mortgage servicer’s perspective, this may put additional pressure on borrower budgets, but this should be outside the mortgage obligation,” she added.

But existing data paints a different picture. According to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, delinquency rates across mortgages, credit cards, auto loans and student debt reached 4.8% of outstanding household debt in fourth-quarter 2025, their highest levels in nearly a decade.

According to the New York Fed’s Q1 2026 data, student loan borrowers continued to face repayment challenges early this year, although fewer fell into serious delinquency than a year earlier. The share of borrowers transitioning into serious delinquency declined to 10.9%, down from 16.2% in the prior quarter, suggesting the pace of new payment problems has begun to slow.

Despite that improvement, the share of student loan balances at least 90 days past due rose to 10.3%, up from 9.6% in the previous quarter. About 2.6 million borrowers who were more than 120 days delinquent had their loans transferred to the U.S. Department of Education‘s Default Resolution Group.

“That’s existing data right before this happened,” Phil Crescenzo Jr. of NFM Lending said in reference to the New York Fed’s data. “So now you have seven and a half million more people that the budgets get strained a little bit or a lot. They’re different than what they were a month ago — and they will be going forward.”

Crescenzo noted that since many student loan repayment plans have placed loans in forbearance, especially following COVID-19, the payments have effectively fallen out of borrowers’ mental and practical budgets.

“You can’t ignore these things,” he said. “They give borrowers 90 days to decide on a new program or plan. That’s plenty of time to respond, but it’s not a lot of time if you’re blowing off notices and not really keying in on the dates.”

Crescenzo said borrowers with multiple small student loans are especially vulnerable. Each loan can report a 90-day delinquency, leading to several serious late marks hitting a credit report at once.

“Now you’re going to have four 90-day lates,” he said. “Good luck trying to overcome that on a mortgage approval. A drop of 40 to 100 points [in a credit score] is easy when that happens.”

Need for proactive analysis, education

The consequences are not evenly felt across loan products. Crescenzo said Federal Housing Administration (FHA) borrowers face a “hard stop” if they incur serious student loan delinquencies, often triggering a two-year waiting period before they can qualify again. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) loan guidelines have shown somewhat more tolerance in select cases, he added.

Jane Mason, CEO and founder of Clarifire, said that the mortgage industry needs to be more “proactive” in looking at a borrower’s whole credit history and portfolio, especially today.

“I’m encouraging our industry to make sure that they’re more proactive,” Mason said. “Look at the escrow analysis contact and use that as an opportunity… so that the borrower is getting more help earlier on, before delinquency really sets in.”

Like Crescenzo, Mason is concerned about how the end of SAVE will impact credit reports.

“We need to look at what the credit companies are reporting and encourage mortgage servicers to pull credit reports more often to proactively help a borrower who has student loan debt that also has a mortgage,” she said.

Mason, who is based in Florida, is especially concerned given the preexisting high costs and high risks associated with homes in the Sunshine State.

“The property insurance is out of control in the state of Florida, and the property taxes are increasing because our values skyrocketed during COVID-19. … We’ve had two hurricanes and so many people have not received FEMA aid, so now we’re seeing delinquencies, especially in the area of FHA, and I think there’s going to be more of that.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

When Americans think about infrastructure, they think about roads, bridges and broadband. But they should also think about housing. A home is the foundation from which families build their lives: where children grow up, neighbors become communities and one generation creates new opportunities for the next. As the United States celebrates its 250th anniversary, homeownership continues to drive financial security, strengthen community ties and create the ability to build and pass down something lasting.

Building communities through the power of home equity 

In the United States’ 250th year, it is clearer than ever how integral homeownership is to American civic stability. In recent years, housing has dominated the national conversation, prompting policymakers across the political spectrum to prioritize pro-housing policies to bring homeownership within reach for more Americans.

A home is more than just a place to live; it provides a foundation for financial stability and the opportunity to build wealth beyond one lifetime, across multiple generations. Owning a home remains the most effective way for families to build lasting generational wealth, with the typical homeowner holding a net worth over 40 times that of a renter. 

Every mortgage payment made is equity built, allowing homeowners to passively accumulate wealth over time while the value of their home is likely increasing. That equity can support a family’s move into a larger home, withstand an unexpected expense, support a child’s future or leave something meaningful to the next generation. 

But ask homeowners what their home means to them, and few will start with equity. They talk about stability: the security of putting down roots, the confidence of building toward something lasting and for some, the opportunity to give their children a stronger start than they had.

Homeownership also strengthens the communities in which that wealth is built, as a critical piece of civic stability for many communities across the country. When individuals own property, they transition from temporary residents to long-term stakeholders committed to improving the neighborhood around them. Homeowners are more likely to vote in local elections and are 1.3 times more likely than renters to become involved in a neighborhood group and join a civic association.

Yet, for many Americans, the goal of homeownership is being delayed. 

Expanding access through legislative and regulatory reform 

Encouragingly, policymakers in Washington are working to advance policies to expand the aspiration of homeownership to more Americans. This includes the bipartisan 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which was passed by both chambers of Congress with overwhelming majorities. 

The legislation includes several meaningful changes that enable cheaper, faster construction of new homes, including: streamlining environmental reviews, encouraging pre-approved housing designs, updating regulations on manufactured homes and lowering construction costs by up to $10,000 per unit. Additionally, the legislation includes a pilot to expand access to Federal Housing Administration (FHA) backed loans under $100,000. 

In addition, policymakers are reconsidering financial rules that shape how capital flows into and through the mortgage market. Most notably, the Trump Administration’s banking regulator’s proposal for Revised Basel III Endgame seeks to safely and sensibly recalibrate the rules to encourage more bank participation in the mortgage market, which should drive down prices for consumers. 

The mortgage industry has also committed itself to innovation and emerging technologies, including AI, to make the mortgage origination process easier, faster and more cost-effective for all stakeholders. Technology is not a substitute for meaningful policy changes, but through continued advancements, it can help consumers navigate an often complicated process by reducing friction, providing real-time updates, and streamlining workflows. 

Modernizing the mortgage ecosystem

One of the challenges in housing finance is that many processes remain highly manual, document-heavy and operationally fragmented. That creates delays, increases costs and limits scalability across origination and servicing. Today, mortgage leaders and loan officers are beginning to use these tools to streamline often tedious processes and better serve more customers, with their capabilities and impact expected to grow considerably over the next year.

That breadth reflects a deeper truth about the industry. It is tempting, quarter to quarter, to tell a “tale of two cities”: origination up here, servicing down there, as if they were unrelated businesses. They are not. 

At its best, the mortgage industry is one integrated ecosystem. Production puts families in homes; servicing keeps them there through every rate environment and economic season. That balance is a strength, not a contradiction, and it is far more relevant to America’s housing future than any single selling season’s headlines.

Committing to the next generation of American homeowners 

Americans have good reason to be optimistic: housing supply has been steadily expanding. In 2024, builders completed approximately 1.6 million new homes, outpacing the 1.3 million homes built in 2019. That structural progress matters more than any near-term volatility in seasonal activity. Much of that progress is linked to deregulation and permitting reform at every level of government, which has made it faster and cheaper to build new homes. Sustaining that momentum will be essential to meeting demand and creating a healthier housing market over the long term. 

Building the housing supply America needs will not happen overnight. It will require policymakers and industry leaders to look beyond the fluctuations of any one quarter and remain focused on the families still waiting for the opportunity to own a home.

Temporary market headwinds and seasonal noise will always capture headlines, but they cannot suppress the deep-seated American desire to own a home. As the nation approaches America 250, policymakers and industry leaders have an opportunity to look beyond near-term uncertainty and dedicate themselves to one of our country’s defining principles: homeownership. It is time to commit ourselves to a more affordable, accessible and resilient housing market for the next generation of Americans.

David Spector is Chairman and CEO of Pennymac.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The Mortgage Industry Standards Maintenance Organization (MISMO) has updated its Mortgage Insurance Implementation Guide to incorporate data requirements for VantageScore 4.0 and FICO 10T, the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) subsidiary announced Thursday.

The guide provides a standardized data framework for electronic information exchange between lenders and mortgage insurers across key processes, including mortgage insurance (MI) rate quotes, commitments, contract underwriting, document delivery and querying for MI order responses, according to the announcement.

The latest changes add support for the newer credit models that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are expected to adopt as part of the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s credit scoring modernization initiative. That shift will require lenders, mortgage insurers and technology providers to adjust how they capture and transmit credit data for loan qualification and pricing.

MISMO said the enhancements are designed to streamline how MI-related information is exchanged across systems, improve consistency in data delivery and help organizations modernize their MI workflows. For lenders, standardized data can reduce custom integrations with individual MI providers and lower the risk of errors or rework when ordering or updating coverage.

“Standardizing how lenders and mortgage insurers exchange information is critical to improving efficiency across the mortgage ecosystem,” Brian Vieaux, president of MISMO said in a statement. “The updated Mortgage Insurance Implementation Guide is essential to enabling the use of modern credit scoring models such as VantageScore 4.0 and FICO 10T. It also helps lenders benefit from improved system integration and more efficient loan qualification, while giving mortgage insurers access to more complete and consistent data.”

The Mortgage Insurance Implementation Guide was developed by MISMO’s Mortgage Insurance Community of Practice in response to industry demand for more consistent MI data exchange practices. The work group is led by Leslie Bensen of MGIC as chair, with Nayanika Sanyal of Arch Mortgage Insurance Co. and Candy Hepfner of MGIC as co-vice chairs.

The guide has reached MISMO’s “Candidate Recommendation” status, meaning it has broad industry consensus and is considered ready for implementation. At this status level, organizations are encouraged to begin planning and execution, with the expectation that only minor clarifications, if any, would be made going forward.

MISMO urged lenders and technology providers to coordinate with their MI partners when implementing the updates. For housing professionals, this coordination will be critical as the industry moves toward production use of VantageScore 4.0 and FICO 10T, which are expected to change how credit risk is measured, especially for thin-file and historically underserved borrowers.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

New York City’s first heat wave of the season is officially here, with triple-digit temperatures and high humidity. Not only can summer in the city be uncomfortable, but it can also become dangerous. To stay cool at home and out and about, we’ve rounded up the best products to help you beat the heat and stay hydrated.

All of these products have been hand-selected by Team 6sqft. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these affiliate links. All prices reflect those at the time of publishing.

Cooling gear

Honeywell QuietSet Whole Room Tower Fan, Oscillating Tower Fan with Remote, Black, HYF290B

While fans don’t lower the temperature in a room, they do make you feel cooler. This 40-inch-tall, whole-room tower fan has eight speeds and oscillates. It’s also quiet and has a timer, dimming options, a handle, and a remote control with storage.
Honeywell QuietSet Whole Room Oscillating Tower Fan with Remote, $64 at Amazon

ZAFRO Smart Inverter Portable Air Conditioners, 16000 BTU (12000 BTU SACC) Dual Hose Portable AC Unit with Energy Saving/Ultra Quiet(38dB Upgraded)/Drainage-free Cool/APP/Remote for Multi-Scenario Use

When you need more than a fan, this portable air conditioner has six modes: cool mode, dry mode to reduce humidity, fan mode, extra mode for fast cooling, sleep mode, and ECO mode. The air conditioner has a digital display on the top, and can also be controlled via app on your smartphone – and it works with Google Home as well. The hose can be installed in both horizontal and vertical sliding windows, and the air conditioner can run for 72 hours without needing to be drained.
ZAFRO Smart Inverter Portable Air Conditioner, 16,000 BTU, $620/ Sale $558 at Amazon

Shark ChillPill – The Only 3-in-1 Personal Cooling System with Fan, InstaChill Cooling Plate & Dry-Touch Mist – Portable, Handheld, Drops Skin Temp Up to 16°F, 10 Speeds, Haze, FA022LV

Carry your personal cooling system wherever you go with this handheld fan, which has 10 fan speeds and a rechargeable battery that lasts up to 11 hours. However, the device also has an icy-cold cooling plate that you can apply to lower your skin’s temperature up to 16 degrees. And the dry-touch evaporative mist can be used to drop temperatures, whether you’re indoors or outside. You can wear the fan, place it on a desk or table, hang it, or hold it. Color choices are haze, dragon fruit, carbon, glacier, and iced latte.
Shark ChillPill 3-in-1 Fan, Cooling Plate and Dry-Touch Mist, $150/Sale $130 at Amazon

You already know that a shower can cool you off. However, this soap bar can further cool and energize your skin. The bar contains eucalyptus, spearmint, and coconut oil, and each time you lather up, you’ll feel refreshed and hydrated. It’s also free of parabens, phthalates, silicones, sulfates, dyes, and fragrances.
Arctic Wave Cooling Body Bar, $10 at Pure & Gentle Soap

Sleep cool

Harbor House Cooling Stretch Jersey Bed Sheets – Queen Size, Blue – Cool-Touch Nylon Blend, Moisture-Wicking & Breathable for Hot Sleepers, Deep Pocket, Soft & Stretchy 4-Piece Sheet Set

These cooling stretch jersey sheets are temperature-regulating and silky-soft. They’re made from a breathable nylon blend that is cool to the touch and moisture-wicking. And since the sheets have 10% spandex for stretching, they stay in place. Colors include blue, ivory, white, and grey.
Harbor House Cooling Stretch Jersey Bed Sheets, $192 at Amazon

Harbor House Cooling Reversible Tencel Comforter Blanket – Full/Queen Size, Cool-Touch Nylon Blend, Moisture-Wicking & Breathable for Hot Sleepers, Gray/Charcoal, 90x94 Inches

If you’re like me, you reach for the covers even in the summer. This cooling comforter has a cool-to-the-touch nylon blend. The fabric is lightweight and breathable, and is designed to wick away moisture and regulate your body’s temperature to keep you cool at night. The color choices are white, gray/charcoal, ivory, and linen/deep linen.
Harbor House Cooling Reversible Tencel Comforter, $128 at Amazon

Miracle Made RemyCloud Adjustable Cooling Pillow– Dual-Sided, Instant-Cool Fabric & Breathable Cotton Covers – Moisture-Absorbent, Machine Washable Loft with 2 Removable Inserts Each (2, Standard)

Both sides of these pillows are cooling. One side is an instant-cool nylon that feels up to 4 degrees cooler. The other side is made of breathable 100% cotton for a soft, gentle coolness. The dual-sided cooling pillows are antimicrobial and machine washable. They’re also adjustable, so you can unzip the pillows and remove the inserts to adjust the loft.
Miracle Made RemyCloud Adjustable Cooling Pillow Pair, $178 at Amazon

Helix ComfortAdjust Cooling Standard Pillow for Side, Back & Stomach Sleepers – Shredded Foam, Customizable Loft & Firmness, Cool-to-Touch Cover for Hot Sleepers & Neck Pain Relief

Another option is a pair of these cool-to-the-touch pillows, which can also be adjusted for the desired level of firmness. Unzip the pillow and then add or remove some of the shredded memory foam and down alternative fibers to make it as thick or flat as you prefer. The pillows have a GlacioTex cover that dissipates heat and regulates your body’s temperature to keep you cooler as you sleep.
Helix ComfortAdjust Cooling Pillow, $127 at Amazon

Jabees Peace Duo Pillow Speaker for Sleeping – Dual Under Pillow Speakers for Side Sleepers, Bluetooth + SD Card, Sleep Timer, No Earbuds, Preloaded Sleep Sounds

This under-pillow speaker will calm you down to help you sleep (because tossing and turning only makes you hotter). Using bone conduction technology, the speaker goes under your pillow and provides music that only you can hear. It provides true stereo sound, has sleep timers, and a 10-hour playtime. The speaker is pre-loaded with sea waves, rain, and wind sounds, and you can also stream sounds and music from your phone.
Jabees Peace Duo Pillow Speaker, $60 at Amazon

Eat, drink, and stay hydrated

Ka’Chava Whole Body Meal Shake Chocolate 2 lb – Vegan Protein Powder with 85+ Superfoods & Greens – Plant-Based Meal Replacement with Probiotics & Digestive Enzymes – Gluten & Dairy Free (15 Servings)

When it’s too hot to cook, this meal shake contains over 85 superfoods and greens, along with 25 grams of plant-based protein, 6 grams of fiber, and 26 vitamins and minerals. The 2-pound bag provides 15 servings, and the drinks are flavorful but not too sweet and not gritty. Flavors include chocolate, chocolate mint, chai, coffee, matcha, strawberry, vanilla, and a variety pack.
Ka’Chava Whole Body Meal Shake, $80 at Amazon

Yonanas Portable Shaved Ice Maker Cordless and Rechargeable with Hands-Free Operation for Fluffy Snow Cones, Slushies and Frozen Drinks, USB-C Charging, 2 Ice Molds Included, in Silver

Here’s a fun way to cool off. This shaved ice maker can be used to create clean, healthy treats from fresh fruit juice, plant-based milk, or your favorite coffee or espresso. The shaved ice maker is easy to use. One touch provides a fluffy, snow-like texture. And the portable machine is also cordless. The set includes two reusable ice molds, an ice bowl, a USB-C charging cable, a cleaning brush, and a storage cover.
Yonanas Portable Shaved Ice Maker, $50 at Amazon

Crush ice to make your favorite drinks, and also blend milk shakes, smoothies, and more with this 3-in-1 appliance that’s a blender, food processor, and personal blender. It has a 1200-watt motor, touch-activated display, and five preset functions. The 8-cup processor has a generous 3” feed tube, and the 50oz Tritan blending jar provides mess-free pouring. The 20-oz Tritan personal blending cup has a lid and straw for on-the-go. Color choices are hydrangea, black sesame, porcini, sage green, and white icing.
Beautiful 3-in-1 Kitchen System, Blender, Food Processor, and Personal Blender, $139 at Walmart

Dermatone Lip Balm Fruit Variety Pack | Moisturizing Lip Care | Soothes & Heals Dry, Chapped Lips | SPF 30 | Aloe, Tea Tree Oil | 3-Pack (Coconut, Mango, Green Tea)

When it’s hot, don’t forget to keep your lips moisturized. This lip balm variety pack provides UV A/UVB sunscreen protection to hydrate, replenish, and soothe your lips. The variety packs include pomegranate, mango and coconut, or green tea, coconut, and the original flavor.
Dermatone Lip Balm Fruit Variety Pack, $11 at Amazon

Solbari Compact Sun Protective Umbrella UPF 50+ UV Protection, Ultra-Light & Travel-Friendly, Reflective Sun Protection for Beach, Picnics, & Outdoor Festivals - Clouds - 42 inch

Umbrellas aren’t just for rain. This one provides sun protection. It has a reflective UPF 50+ silver canopy that reduces heat while protecting from UVA and UVB rays, and also keeps you cooler. The fiberglass frame is durable enough to withstand wind and rain, and the ergonomic handle has a simple auto-open button.
Solbari Compact Sun Protective Umbrella, $69 at Amazon

Ocean Bottle PEAK GO 24 oz Water Bottle | Slim Stainless Steel Design with Straw | Leak Proof, Dishwasher Safe and BPA Free | Eco Friendly Bottle (Crimson Sunset)

Keep water and drinks cold for 15 hours (and keep coffee and hot drinks hot for 6 hours) in this 24oz water bottle that’s 100% leak proof and dishwasher safe. It’s made from 90% recycled stainless steel. The bottle has dual openings – you can sip from the spout, or unscrew the base to add ice and clean the interior.
Ocean Bottle PEAK GO 24oz Stainless Steel Water Bottle, $48 at Amazon

LifeStraw Go Series — Water Filter Bottle 2-Pack for Travel and Everyday Use Removes Bacteria, Parasites and Microplastics, Improves Taste, 22 oz 2-Pack, Icelandic Blue and Aegean Sea

Who knows where you may be when you need to refill your water bottle, so one with a water filter can be a lifesaver. And with this two-pack of 22-oz glass water bottles, you’ll never be caught off guard. Each bottle has a filter that removes 99.99 percent of bacteria, parasites, microplastics, sand, and dirt. There’s also an activated carbon capsule to remove chlorine, odors, and organic chemical matter.
LifeStraw Go Series Water Filter Bottle – 2 Pack, $76 at Amazon

You might think the weather’s too warm for an electric kettle. But not if you’re using the hot brew method to make iced tea, where you steep the tea bags or loose tea in boiling water, then add cold water to cool, stir in sugar, and your favorite fruit juice, and serve over ice. Anyway, the 1500-watt kettle boils 7 cups of water in less than 7 minutes, and has a 30-minute keep-warm setting. The touch-activated display has four presets and an automatic shut-off feature. Some of the many color choices include cornflower blue, lavender, hydrangea, rose, and sage green.
Beautiful 1.7L One-Touch Electric Kettle, $37 at Walmart

Ice cream is one of the most fun ways to keep cool – and you can even send personalized pints of ice cream to friends and family members. The Birthday Ice Cream Gift Pack includes four pints of ice cream with the following flavors and corresponding titles: chocolate cake (Happy Birth-YAH!), sea salt caramel brownie (Celebration by the Spoonful), mint cookie crunch (Make a Wish), and cookies & cream (Another Year Sweeter).
eCreamery Personalized Gourmet Handcrafted Ice Cream – 4 Pints, $90 at Amazon

What to wear

Cozy Earth Women’s Short Sleeve Pajama Set - Relaxed Fit with Adjustable Waistband & Side Pockets - Women’s Sleepwear - Green Medium

This bamboo stretch-knit short-sleeve pajama set is made of 95% bamboo viscose and 5% spandex, and it’s breathable, moisture-wicking, and temperature-regulating to keep you cool while you sleep. The set is available in several colors and has contrast piping. The top has a button closure, and the shorts have pockets and an elastic waistband.
Cozy Earth Women’s Short Sleeve Pajama Set, $128 at Amazon

Men's Sweatproof Undershirt - Cotton Crew Neck T-Shirt with Underarm Sweat Pads - Original Fit - Aluminum-Free Alternative - White 2-Pack - Medium

Stay cool and collected in these undershirts that have sweat pads in the underarms. The patented, layered, hydro-shield uses reverse osmosis to pull sweat away from your skin. Moisture and body heat escape as a vapor instead, eliminating sweat stains and keeping you cool and dry. Color choices are white, black, heather grey, and navy.
Thompson Tee Men’s Sweatproof Undershirt with Sweat Pads, Pack of 2, $63 at Amazon

Bombshell Sportswear Perform Thigh High Leggings for Women with Pockets, Workout Running Yoga Pants (as1, Alpha, x_s, Regular, Regular, Midnight)

These high-waisted leggings combine polyester and spandex at the top, along with a mesh fabric on the lower legs for a cooling effect. The leggings also have pockets on both sides for phones, keys, and more. Color choices are midnight and twilight blue.
Bombshell Sportswear Perform Thigh High Leggings for Women with Pockets, $92 at Amazon

OLUKAI Ohana Women's Sandals, Water Resistant Flip Flops with Arch Support, Lightweight Comfort for Beach & Travel, Enhanced Traction for Wet Surfaces, Hot Pink/Black, 7

Keep your feet cool and dry with these lightweight and quick-drying sandals. They have a contoured footbed that feels like you’re walking barefoot in the sand. Arch support provides relief from foot fatigue. The sandals are versatile enough to wear with dresses, jeans, shorts, or beachwear. There are over a dozen color choices, including ocean fog/black, paradise pink/lava rock, almond/dark java, and more. The company also makes men’s sandals.
OLUKAI Ohana Women’s Sandals, $80 at Amazon

Wallaroo Hat Company – Women’s Bali Fedora – UPF 30+ Sun Protection, Wide Brim, Packable and Adjustable Sizing for Medium Crown Sizes – Fashionable Sun Hat for Everyday Sun Protection (Natural)

This hat adds a stylish touch while also reducing your exposure to damaging UV rays and providing some shade. It’s made from 100% natural fibers and has an oversized 4” brim. The hat provides UPF 30+ sun protection and blocks 95% of UV rays. The breathable hat has a medium crown size and an inner drawstring to adjust the fit. It can be folded (soft taco fold) for packing.
Wallaroo Hat Company Women’s Bali Fedora Hat, $61 at Amazon

Rab Men's Airox Backpack - Lightweight Breathable Backpack for Hiking, Trekking, & Backpacking - Mulberry - 18-Liter (Back Length - Medium)

No one wants to lug a hot and heavy backpack around during the summer. However, this backpack has a ventilated back system that keeps air flowing freely, so your back is never hot and sweaty. The body-contouring suspended mesh distributes weight, allowing the backpack to remain comfortable. Color choices are mulberry, black, and tempest blue.
Rab Men’s Airox Backpack 18-Liter, $165/Sale $124 at Amazon

RELATED:

The post The best cooling products to survive a hot NYC summer first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

With the first half of 2026 in the rearview mirror, the reverse mortgage industry continues to work through a variety of pain points that are keeping origination and securitization levels historically low.

HousingWire‘s Reverse Mortgage Daily (RMD) analyzed page views to uncover the most popular stories during the first six months of the year. While mortgage rates, mortgage insurance premiums and reverse mortgage sales tactics are noteworthy subjects, here are the stories that captured the most attention.

1. States debate senior property tax relief

Rising property taxes across much of the country are catching the attention of homeowners — and that’s especially true for seniors living on fixed incomes. At least three states attempted legislative efforts that would lower costs and better equip older residents for aging in place.

In Tennessee, Rutherford County Assessor Rob Mitchell pushed the Tennessee Golden Homeowners Tax Relief Program, a proposal that would allow full reimbursement of property taxes for homeowners 65 and older who have lived in the Volunteer State for at least 20 years. The cost of the program would equal approximately 3% of the state’s annual state budget and could be funded by a recurring surplus estimated at $1.5 billion to $2.5 billion per year. But the proposal hasn’t gone anywhere, and the assessor’s office has been embroiled in controversy after state officials determined that many recent assessments were “riddled with errors.”

Kentucky lawmakers advanced Senate Bill 51, a proposed constitutional amendment to freeze property tax assessments for homeowners 65 and older. Supporters cited relief for fixed-income seniors, while the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy warned about funding strains for schools and local governments that rely on the revenue. The state Senate passed the bill unanimously, but it did not receive enough votes in the House to be placed on voter ballots this year.

Meanwhile, in New Jersey, Gov. Mikie Sherrill proposed scaled-back property tax relief in her first-year budget. The plan would have cut the income cap for eligibility to $250,000 and reduced the maximum relief to $4,000 per years. But that plan never came to pass: This week, Sherrill signed the state’s fiscal year 2027 budget, which includes more than $4.1 billion in property tax relief through three programs. One of them was revised to provide higher annual benefits of up to $6,500, depending on household income.

2. Senior home sellers take a hit on profits

Older homeowners, especially those over 70, make significantly lower returns when selling their homes, according to a research brief published by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. The brief found that poor upkeep, the rise of private listings and the prevalence of sales to real estate investors are driving that gap.

The gap grows with age and translates into tens of thousands of dollars in lost value on a typical sale. An 80-year-old seller earns about 0.5% less per year than a 45-year-old. Over an average 11-year holding period, that adds up to sales proceeds that are roughly 5% lower. On a $400,000 home, the difference is about $20,000.

That information comes at a time when baby boomers represent the nation’s largest group of home buyers and sellers. And it could provide food for thought as originators and real estate agents work to breathe life into reverse mortgage for purchase programs, which have been underutilized for many years.

3. Aging in place is reshaping housing demand

Aging in place is often driven out of financial necessity, Rosarium Health CEO Cameron Carter said in a recent interview with RMD. Affordable housing alternatives are often in short supply for this population, and the cost of assisting-living facilities and other types of long-term care are making those options more prohibitive.

A former value-based care executive at DaVita and Bright Health, Carter said there’s a simple but profound problem occurring: Most homes aren’t built to handle the specific needs of seniors and require signification modifications to get there. “Ninety percent of housing was built in this country before the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) was even a law, and the ADA only applies to public spaces — not private residences,” he said.

Aging-in-place experts are attempting to educate the reverse mortgage industry about smart-home technology and other tools that could address these issues. Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs), proprietary reverse mortgages and flexible home equity lines of credit designed for seniors could finance these necessary home improvements.

4. Older women stand out as prime reverse mortgage candidates

An AARP survey found that women 50 and older are insecure about retirement, the high costs of health care, emergency savings efforts and caregiving duties. And while many of them rely on Social Security benefits, reverse mortgage use remains concentrated among single women.

Federal Housing Administration data shows the HECM program predominantly served single female borrowers in fiscal year 2025, making up 41.1% of all endorsements. That statistic could serve as opportunity for reverse mortgage companies in their marketing and sales efforts.

“In the last six months, I’ve gotten four cold calls from clients, and each one of them said, ‘I just want to work with a woman,’” Christina Harmes, a reverse mortgage broker with Barrett Financial, told RMD. “I’ve had situations where it was a husband and wife. The wife didn’t feel cared for and spoken to properly by the originator who was male, so she went and looked up somebody else.”

5. Elon Musk says retirement savings could become ‘irrelevant’

Near the start of the year, Elon Musk raised some eyebrows when he suggested future technological abundance, driven by artificial intelligence, could make retirement savings a relic of the past. Musk, who became the world’s first trillionaire after the public launch of SpaceX, made the comments on a podcast.

“One side recommendation I have is: Don’t worry about squirreling money away for retirement in 10 or 20 years,” Musk said. “It won’t matter. If any of the things that we said are true, saving for retirement will be irrelevant.”

“The good future is anyone can have whatever stuff they want,” he added. “That would mean better medical care than anyone has today, available for everyone within five years. No scarcity of goods and services. You can learn anything you want about anything for free.”

His statement, unsurprisingly, received immediate and sharp pushback from financial planners and other retirement experts. Survey data released in April by the Employee Benefit Research Institute showed that 64% of Americans express confidence about having enough money for a comfortable retirement. But that means roughly one-third don’t have confidence. And sentiment declined over the past year among workers and retirees alike.

Financial adviser Ryan Ponsford of Equity Wealth Strategies recently told RMD that clients should have “different spigots you can pull” in retirement, ranging from Social Security and pensions to stock-and-bond portfolios and Roth IRAs.

“The reverse mortgage line of credit is typically not an option until you’re 62, so you don’t have to spend a bunch of time on it if the client is 50. But I might start positioning them to account for their home in their retirement plan,” Ponsford said.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The opening day of a high-stakes preliminary injunction hearing in Zillow’s antitrust lawsuit against Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) and Compass International Holdings laid out two sharply different stories about who is trying to shape how listings are marketed — and for whose benefit.

In opening statements and testimony from its witnesses, Zillow argued that multiple listing service MRED and brokerage giant Compass conspired to weaponize MRED’s rules to block Zillow’s listing access standards and a new premarket product, Zillow Preview, in order to protect private listing networks.

MRED and Compass countered that Zillow is the one trying to weaponize MLS data, in violation of rules born out of a 2008 Department of Justice (DOJ) settlement with the National Association of Realtors (NAR).

The case centers on whether MRED can suspend its IDX and VOW listing data feeds to Zillow if the listing portal filters or suppresses certain listings and whether Compass unlawfully pushed MRED to do so. 

Zillow: Group boycott to protect private listing networks

In her opening, Zillow attorney Bonnie Lau framed the dispute as a classic antitrust case over access to an essential input. According to Lau’s arguments, Zillow says its business model depends on comprehensive, timely listings, especially brand-new listings that generate the most consumer engagement and lead volume. Errol Samuelson, Zillow’s chief industry development officer, testified that new listings are “the lifeblood” of Zillow’s platform.

According to exhibits shown during Samuelson’s testimony, on “day zero” when a listing first hits the market, it averages nearly 180 page views on Zillow. By day five, that falls to around 60 views per day and continues to decline. Serious buyers focus on the freshest inventory, and that is where Zillow generates the most agent connections and referral revenue.

Additionally, Samuelson testified that PLNs restrict seller exposure and reduce competition, deny buyers access to the full set of available homes, pull agents and consumers toward the largest brokerages that control off-market inventory, raising barriers for smaller firms and increase the number of agents or firms double-ending deals.

“We think they’re harmful for consumers. We think they’re harmful for sellers. They’re bad for buyers. We think they reduce competition in the real estate industry,” Samuelson said of PLNs.

Zillow’s listing access standards and Preview product

Samuelson also answered questions regarding Zillow’s listing access standards policy, which the firm debuted in April 2025, before rolling out the application of the policy nationwide in late June 2025.  The standards, applied on a listing-by-listing basis, are designed to discourage “selective or gated marketing” while preserving true seller privacy choices, Samuelson testified.

In his testimony, Samuelson said “truly private” listings — such as office exclusives, which he acknowledged are the “least transparent kind of listing,” for sellers with privacy concerns — remain permissible, but only if the seller signs a waiver acknowledging reduced exposure and the listing is not broadly promoted online behind a simple registration gate.

Samuelson stressed that the standards are tied to how a listing is marketed, not who the listing broker is. He also testified that if a seller fires the original agent and lists with a new agent, Zillow will display that property, even if it was previously in a PLN, because it does not want to “penalize the new agent” or the seller a second time.

Beyond the standards, Zillow launched Zillow Preview in March 2026 as a premarket tool that it says competes directly with PLNs but with full transparency. Samuelson described Preview as a “trailer for a movie”: Consumers cannot tour the home yet but can see that it is “coming soon” and register interest.

MRED and Compass: Zillow is trying to weaponize MLS data

In opening statements and testimony from their witnesses, who included Chris Haran, MRED’s chief technology officer and managing director, and Fran Broude, a Compass regional vice president, the defendants rejected Zillow’s framing and said the real issue is Zillow’s attempt to use MLS data to force a particular business model on competitors.

MRED’s counsel, Stephen Libowsky, argued that MRED’s “objective criteria” rule is a neutral, long-standing requirement designed to preserve data integrity and ensure that no MLS participant can use listing display as a “sword or shield” against competitors. That rule, he said, is grounded in the 2008 DOJ–NAR settlement, which required MLSs to give equal access to listings to prevent incumbents from blocking online entrants.

Under those principles, MLS participants can filter or sort listings on objective property characteristics — such as price, property type, location or features — but not based on the identity or marketing strategy of the listing broker or agent, Libowsky said. He told the court that MRED has enforced that non-discrimination framework for nearly two decades and across thousands of brokerages of all sizes.

Conversely, Libowsky characterized Zillow’s listing access standards as an attempt to “weaponize MLS data” to coerce sellers and agents away from competing marketing strategies, including Compass’s multi-phase marketing program. He said Zillow’s own documents admit that the standards are “designed to get sellers to switch brokers.”

Zillow, he argued, is free to pursue its preferred transparent, all-on-MLS-first model but cannot use MLS feeds — which are governed by neutral participation rules — to punish brokers that do not adopt that model. In his telling, MRED repeatedly warned Zillow, beginning when the standards were announced in 2025, that banning listings based on how they were previously marketed would violate MRED’s rules and the parties’ license agreement.

Instead of changing course, Libowsky said, Zillow “played hardball” and now seeks to label ordinary contract enforcement as an antitrust conspiracy.

Compass counsel Nate Eimer focused on three main themes

Those themes were: Absence of a conspiracy, the lack of antitrust injury and Zillow’s inability to show irreparable harm.

On conspiracy, Eimer argued that Compass acted unilaterally and lawfully when it complained to MRED and other MLSs about Zillow’s listing bans. Discovery, Eimer said, shows that Zillow’s enforcement was overwhelmingly directed at Compass. Of roughly 1,500 listings banned under the standards in the relevant period, he said, all but eight were Compass listings. 

Regarding antitrust injury, Eimer told the court that the antitrust laws protect competition and output — not a particular firm’s business strategy. Zillow’s alleged injury is its inability to reduce output by banning listings it disfavors. Unless a restraint reduces the number of homes available to consumers, he said, there is no antitrust problem. 

Finally, on irreparable harm, Compass emphasized that any harm to Zillow is “entirely self-inflicted” and compensable with monetary damages. Zillow has never enforced its standards in the MRED region, Eimer claimed, even though MRED has had a PLN since 2016. During that period, Zillow became the dominant portal without enforcing the standards in Chicagoland. If Zillow loses MRED’s feed now, he said, it can restore access “the moment it leaves the courtroom” by agreeing to display the affected listings.

In contrast, Zillow’s chief financial officer Jeremy Hoffman testified that the harm from losing MRED’s feed cannot be reduced to a number. 

“If we lose access to listings, highly likely we lose access to consumers, we lose advertisers,” he said. “Our brand promise is broken.”

MRED’s rule change, Compass outreach and the Realtor.com deal

Samuelson’s testimony also detailed what Zillow says is a factual chain showing coordination between Compass and MRED.

In October 2025, Compass CEO Robert Reffkin emailed at least eight MLSs urging them to terminate Zillow’s feeds if Zillow enforced its listing access standards in their markets. Samuelson said he personally spoke with one of those MLSs; that MLS told him it would not cut Zillow off, concluded Zillow’s standards were objective and “appreciated” Zillow’s stance on transparency.

Less than two weeks after Reffkin’s outreach, MRED notified Zillow it was revising its IDX/VOW display rules. In an email, MRED said it wanted to “supply this issue for you to ensure your Zillow listing transparency policy, if implemented in our markets, is compliant.” The changes, which took effect October 29, 2025, added language barring websites from refusing to display listings based on the identity of the listing agent or brokerage.

MRED’s position, Samuelson said, was that Zillow’s standards now violated those revised rules. Zillow disagreed, arguing that the standards are applied objectively to listings’ marketing practices, not to particular firms, and offered to modify the language further to clarify that no broker-specific factors would be used. According to Samuelson, MRED rejected those proposed compromises. Due to a lack of alternative MLS options in the Chicagoland market, Samuelson said Zillow chose not to enforce its standards in the MRED footprint to avoid losing its local IDX/VOW feeds. 

In contrast, MRED and Compass said that the October 2025 notices regarding MRED’s rules was just a clarification of its longstanding policy, which MRED claimed Zillow had requested. 

In his testimony, Haran said: “We believed that the original rule already said that. We were asked for a clarification, and we added that clarification.”

What’s at stake

The legal question facing Judge Tharp is whether MRED’s enforcement of its clarified objective criteria rule — in response to Compass complaints and against a dominant portal — is a legitimate application of a neutral policy, or an unlawful group boycott designed to suppress a rival’s product and preserve private listing networks.

In an emailed statement, an MRED spokesperson told HousingWire that the “lawsuit is just a breach of contract case, not an antitrust conspiracy.”

“MRED is enforcing a neutral rule designed to maintain data integrity between brokerages and preserve the viability of MLSs as valuable services in the real estate industry,” the spokesperson added. “Zillow’s purported harm is entirely self-inflicted and can be remedied immediately by simply complying with the same clear and longstanding license agreement terms that Zillow has complied with for years.”

As the hearing continues on Thursday, the court is expected to hear testimony from MRED CEO Rebecca Jensen and Compass CEO Robert Reffkin, as well as two expert witnesses, Lawrence Wu, the president of NERA Economic Consulting, and attorney Debra Aron, who is the vice president of Charles River Associates’ Competition Practice. The witnesses are expected to testify on the competitive impact of PLNs, the scope of MRED’s market power and the feasibility of alternatives like direct feeds.

This article was written by Brooklee Han and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

TitleEase is gaining momentum as demand grows for its franchise-based title insurance model — backed by a recent capital raise, strategic acquisitions and an expanding pipeline of real estate and mortgage partners.

The company completed a capital raise that closed at the end of May, with funding slated to bolster continued expansion, and is seeing increased market interest, with licensing now secured in 46 states.

Company leaders told HousingWire they’re now meeting with approximately 200 prospective brokers each month.

“Some of our larger customers, about three and a half years ago, came to us and said, ‘Hey, we see the HUD statements. We know title. We know you guys are making a killing, so can we participate?’ And we said, ‘No problem. We’d love for you to do that. Let us legally figure out what’s the best way to do it.’ After a lot of money invested in legal, the vehicle that was the best way to do it was a franchise system.”

In California and Texas, franchisees also establish escrow companies alongside their title operations.

The ramped up growth strategy was already underway with the acquisition of California-based Landwood Title at the end of 2025.

That purchase gave TitleEase licensing coverage across all 58 California counties — helping the company serve one of the nation’s most difficult states for title licensing while supporting brokers and lenders seeking to establish title and escrow operations.

A different approach to title ownership

Founded in 2021, TitleEase is part of the Rhode Island-based Lincoln Family of Companies.

Led by CEO Joseph D’Urso, it offers a franchise model designed to help real estate brokerages, mortgage lenders and entrepreneurs establish fully compliant title insurance and settlement businesses.

Unlike traditional joint ventures, TitleEase structures its model so franchise owners establish and own their own title company — while relying on the parent organization for operational infrastructure, compliance, licensing assistance, software, vendor relationships and ongoing support.

Oakley said the concept grew out of requests from existing customers seeking to participate more directly in title revenue.

He described the offering as “a title company in a box.” “Here’s your box. It has a title company in it and it has your LLC,” Oakley said. “It has all your compliance and all your licensing. “We’ll even help you find and recruit the licensed title person in your state. If you don’t know what to ask them, we do.”

The company also assists franchisees with regulatory compliance, underwriter relationships, staffing guidance, operational manuals and ongoing coaching designed to reduce barriers to entering the title industry.

Revenue is shared equally between TitleEase and franchise owners — with each side responsible for separate operating costs while working together to grow transaction volume.

“We are true partners with them, and we’re here to help you grow,” Oakley said. “If you say you can do 30 policies a month today, great. We’re going to do everything in our power to make sure we get you to 100 policies a month in six months, because we make more money when you make more money.”

Growth strategy, long-term value

Investor Richard Bitner said the company’s most significant expansion efforts have occurred over the past year following new funding and additional hiring.

“Joe D’Urso, the founder and braintrust behind this, spent a lot of time with CFPB talking to them about this structure before we ever launched,” he said. “I think part of the problem with joint ventures is they tend to be opaque. If there’s anything that CFPB kind of hates, it’s when you can’t really tell who’s making what, where, how, why or who’s responsible.

“We’ve taken the exact absolute opposite approach. So, on the [HUD statement], you’ll actually see two title fees, where the fees get split between the parent company that does the work and the title franchise directly. It’s the absolute opposite of what’s been happening with the [joint ventures].”

Beyond creating an additional revenue source, executives believe the model gives brokerages and lenders greater operational visibility while creating a business asset that owners can eventually sell independently.

“When we’re talking about a reduced margin environment, which we’re in, with interest rates being up, I think the ability for anybody who’s doing 10 or more transactions a month — that’s kind of the general number we’re looking at, if you can contribute 10 or more — might consider this as an opportunity.”

He added that ownership extends beyond monthly income.

Leaders also believe ownership can strengthen recruiting by offering agents and loan officers an opportunity to participate in a business that generates additional revenue beyond traditional commissions.

Looking ahead

Executives say the combination of recent investment, expanded licensing capabilities and growing industry awareness positions TitleEase for continued national expansion.

Oakley said the company’s growth reflects increasing interest from brokerages and lenders looking to bring title operations in-house while avoiding the complexity of building those businesses independently.

“We’re now [onboarding] between five and 10 [new franchises] a month,” he said. “We have people actually reaching out and saying, ‘Hey, I heard about you guys, and I heard you’ve got a phenomenal program where you know I can make some ancillary revenue off of transactions that I already control.’”

As TitleEase continues signing new franchisees and pursuing acquisitions, leaders believe the franchise model offers an alternative to traditional title joint ventures by combining ownership, operational support and regulatory compliance within a single platform.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Oil prices are at $67, the jobs data missed estimates with negative revisions, and mortgage rates are still near yearly highs. So, should the Federal Reserve still be super hawkish after this jobs report?   

Over the past two months, I’ve been focused on why the 10-year yield and mortgage rates might not drop as much as people think, given that the Fed has flipped from two to three rate cuts to two to three rate hikes. However, after this week — with oil prices as low as they are and this jobs report — I believe the Fed hawks will lose their momentum and we should not have any rate hikes in 2026 if the data stays the same.

From BLS: Both total nonfarm payroll employment (+57,000) and the unemployment rate (4.2 percent) changed little in June, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment continued to trend up in professional and business services, social assistance, and health care. Leisure and hospitality lost jobs.

As we can see in the chart below, the labor data took a big hit in the leisure category, and the prime-age labor force participation rate had the largest one-month drop ever. With the World Cup creating a lot of hiring and firings, the labor data should be very noisy, so we can strip out a lot of that volatility when we look at the rest of the year.

Because we had a big drop in the labor force rate in this report, the unemployment rate fell to 4.2%. Without the labor force rate falling, the unemployment rate, of course, would be much higher. We should see a rebound in the prime age labor force participation rate next month, but in general terms, without much immigration, the labor force has been cooling off.

chart visualization

One of the most critical data lines for a recession, residential construction labor, doesn’t look great right now. When Fed Chair Kevin Warsh said twice in his June Fed press event that policy is too restrictive for housing, this chart and housing starts validates that point. Even Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack, a hawk, agrees with that.

chart visualization

On top of the jobs report missing estimates, oil prices got close to my $67 target level. If they go below $67, I will be shocked myself, but we are on the verge of my call being wrong. If oil prices head even lower than $67, it will be hard for the Fed hawks who made rising oil prices a reason for rate hikes to stay hawkish. 

chart visualization

Will the Fed continue to be super hawkish after this jobs report? I don’t believe they can be. Some members, like Hammack, would be hawkish even if the last five jobs reports were negative, as long as the unemployment rate was low and jobless claims were in check. Minneapolis Fed President Neil Kashkari, who talked about one rate hike this week, often changes his views, but many of the Fed members who went very hawkish at the June Fed meeting haven’t made their views public since conditions have changed.

I believe the Fed’s break-even is 33,000, meaning they need to see more than 33,000 jobs created per month to keep the unemployment rate low. The last six months on average is 92,000 per month; that is good enough for them on the labor side unless they want to come and say it isn’t. Until that happens, don’t look for the bond market to do it for them just yet.

Conclusion

I know we have some frustrated people in mortgage and real estate — oil prices have collapsed and jobs data missed the estimate, but the 10-year yield is at 4.47% and mortgage rates are near yearly highs. I’ve tried to give a heads-up on why yields might not go down as much if oil crashes, which is what has occurred.

On a positive note, I do believe that with the full data we have, many doves who turned hawkish at the last Fed meeting will tone down their stance now, which could be good for yields and mortgage rates.  After this week, the market has now priced in only one rate hike, and that is now in December, so maybe we avoid a rate hike altogether this year.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The Macy’s 4th of July Fireworks show is set for its largest display in its 50-year history in celebration of America’s 250th birthday. Commemorating the occasion, Macy’s will launch more than 85,000 shells from three locations: the Brooklyn Bridge, the East River near the South Street Seaport, and the Hudson River in collaboration with Jersey City. While there are many ticketed watch parties planned across the five boroughs, the show’s record-breaking scale also means more free viewing locations than in previous years.

Credit: NYC Mayor’s Office

Those who did not receive front-row tickets to the spectacle through the city lottery can view the fireworks from non-ticketed public viewing areas along the FDR Drive in Manhattan. Lottery winners can find out more about their designated viewing areas here.

These are the entry points to the FDR Drive viewing spots:

  • Montgomery Street at Madison Street
  • Robert F. Wagner Sr. Place and Brooklyn Bridge off/on ramps
  • Broad Street at Water Street

Recommended ADA viewing will be available at the NYC Vietnam Veterans Memorial Plaza, accessible from the east side of Water Street at Coenties Slip, and at Pier 35, accessible via Cherry Street at Rutgers Slip.

Viewing at designated sections in Brooklyn Bridge Park and the South Street Seaport will be accessible only through free tickets issued by the city.

Credit: Jersey City Office of Cultural Affairs

Jersey City is hosting an all-day festival for the 4th of July, with 60 vendors, DJs, two beer gardens, and a Kids’ Zone with activations and bounce castles. The event, which kicks off at 12 p.m., concludes with prime viewing of the fireworks along the Hudson River at Exchange Place, the Hudson River Waterfront Walkway, and at the Colgate Clock near Essex Street.

According to Macy’s, these are the following Jersey City waterfront access points:

  • 2nd Street & Hudson Street
  • Hudson Street & Harborside Place
  • Christopher Columbus Drive & Hudson Street
  • York Street & Hudson Street
  • Grand Street & Hudson Street
  • ADA accessible viewing is available at 70 Hudson Street at the Hudson River Walkway
  • Washington Street & Dudley Street (Paulus Hook section) 
  • Essex Street & Hudson Street
  • Colgate Clock

The fireworks show is set to begin at 9:25 p.m. on Saturday, July 4. This year’s display will feature more than 85,000 shells in 30 colors, along with a laser show and a star-studded broadcast.

Visitors can look forward to 20,000 different firework effects, including morning glories, red wolves, color-changing ghost shells, and atomic rings. Pyrotechnic effects will be staged at 240 positions between the main towers of the Brooklyn Bridge, reaching heights of up to 1,000 feet, according to Macy’s.

The broadcast will be hosted by Terry Crews, with performances by Alexia Jayy, Noah Kahan, Post Malone, Bebe Rexha, Salt-N-Pepa, Shaboozey, and Blake Shelton. It will air on NBC and Peacock starting at 8 p.m.

For those looking to celebrate the 4th of July with a little money to spend, 6sqft has put together a list of the best ticketed fireworks watch parties.

RELATED:

The post Where to watch the Macy’s July 4th fireworks for free first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

When Zillow launched Zillow Preview alongside a coalition of leading brokerages earlier this year, there was a moment of relief across the housing industry. Many hoped the company’s sustained campaign against private listings had finally run its course. Two months later, that hope looks premature.

Zillow’s assault on private listing strategies is disruptive and costly — for agents, brokerages large and small, and especially Compass. The so-called “Zillow ban” was dressed in the language of consumer protection: it cast Compass as the enemy of buyers and a threat to the MLS. Neither charge holds up.

What matters is this: Zillow’s claim to be defending the MLS was really a strategy to protect its dominant market position, monetize MLS data at scale and capture the marketing value that local agents create when they prepare homes for sale.

How it all came down

The ban emerged in direct response to NAR’s March 2025 decision to introduce new flexibility through its “Multiple Listing Options for Sellers” policy. Critically, NAR did not abandon the Clear Cooperation Policy — it retained it in full — but added an exemption allowing sellers to delay syndication to portals like Zillow for a set period.

NAR’s move reflected hard-won wisdom: Its own rigid listing rules had already cost it a $418 million antitrust settlement over commission practices. Where NAR found room for compromise, Zillow dug in — imposing standards on its platform stricter than what even NAR required.

Compass’s three-phased marketing approach gained legitimacy precisely because NAR acknowledged the commercial logic behind delayed syndication. Beginning a listing as a private exclusive allows sellers and agents to gather market intelligence and stress-test pricing before going fully public. The vast majority of these listings ultimately reach the MLS. The temporary withholding of data is a tool of seller strategy, not market manipulation.

The economics are straightforward

Zillow monetizes listing data as fuel for its Zestimate tool, as inventory for banner advertising, and as raw material for its Premier Agent program — a lead-generation product that routes buyer inquiries around the seller’s own chosen agent. Every listing withheld from Zillow, even temporarily, is lost revenue. The Listing Access Standards were never really about the consumer. They were about keeping the pipeline full.

MRED, the dominant MLS serving the Chicago metro area, updated its rules to ensure sellers retained the full range of marketing options available under NAR policy. It informed Zillow that local rules govern local markets and that agents shouldn’t be penalized for following their clients’ instructions.

When Zillow refused to comply, MRED moved to cut its listing data feed — a serious escalation, but one grounded in the authority that MLSs have always held over data licensing.

Is the real target the seller?

Zillow’s new lawsuit may name Compass and MRED as the defendants, but its real target is the seller. The company is asking a federal court to let it override seller choices — about who represents them and how their property is marketed. What Zillow frames as an illegal conspiracy is, in practice, a brokerage and a local MLS following their clients’ lawful instructions.

The irony is hard to miss. Zillow is wielding the Sherman Antitrust Act against the very market participants whose cooperation makes its platform possible — and doing so while simultaneously facing its own FTC antitrust lawsuit over a deal with Redfin to eliminate competition in multifamily rental listings.

For housing professionals, the question at the center of this fight isn’t complicated: Does a dominant listing portal have the right to dictate how individual home sellers market their properties in order to protect its own data access and revenue model?

Zillow is betting the courts will say yes. The industry should be hoping otherwise.

Kevin C. Gillen, PhD, is Principal Research Fellow with Wilbur C. Henderson Real Estate Institute and Adjunct Professor of Finance at Drexel University. This is Kevin Gillen’s opinion and not necessarily those of Drexel University or the Henderson Real Estate Institute. 

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Construction began this week on what will become one of Brooklyn’s tallest buildings. Located at 205 Montague Street in Brooklyn Heights, One Montague Place will rise roughly 50 stories and include 46 condominiums, 90 rentals, 40,000 square feet of retail, and an ultra-luxe amenity package, including a jazz club. Developed by Landau Properties in partnership with Third Millennium Group and Midtown Equities, and designed by Hill West Architects, One Montague Place will reach 672 feet, making it one of the tallest towers in the borough.

“From the outset, our ambition was to bring together an extraordinary constellation of partners to create something truly singular—where architecture, design, hospitality, wellness, and culture come together in a way Brooklyn has never seen before,” Jonathan Landau, founder and CEO of Landau Properties, said.

“Brooklyn Heights has always drawn people who understand that where you live is an expression of who you are,” he added. “One Montague Place is our answer to them: a home worthy of the neighborhood, and a new vantage point on Brooklyn Heights.”

At the nexus of Downtown Brooklyn and Brooklyn Heights, the $550 million development sits on a 19,000-square-foot parcel across from Brooklyn Borough Hall, Columbus Park, and Cadman Plaza Park. The site was once home to the Brooklyn Dodgers’ headquarters, where Jackie Robinson signed with the team. In 1962, the structure was replaced by an office building, which has now been demolished to make way for the tower, according to CityRealty.

If completed today, the 672-foot-tall building would rank as the third-tallest in Brooklyn, surpassed only by Brooklyn Tower and Brooklyn Point, CityRealty reported. But under-construction One Third Avenue, the 730-foot-tall Passive House, and 395 Flatbush Avenue Extension, a 72-story mixed-use building with 1,200 apartments, will be taller.

The luxury condos will start at sprawling 3,000 square feet and feature at least three bedrooms, private outdoor space, custom-designed kitchens, and access to a range of lifestyle amenities.

Planned unit layouts include half-floor, full-floor, and triplex apartments. The spacious units will feature custom kitchens with Gaggenau appliances, wet and dry bars, and generous private outdoor space with panoramic views of New York Harbor, the Manhattan skyline, and the East River bridges.

The architects took inspiration from the indoor-outdoor living of the neighborhood’s brownstones when designing the apartments.

“We envisioned One Montague Place as a contemporary extension of the Brooklyn Heights neighborhood by creating a tower with a timeless and unmistakable form,” Stephen Hill, founding partner of Hill West Architects, said.

“Translating the ease of indoor/outdoor living commonly found in brownstones to residences in the sky encompassed by expansive loggias was a main design driver for the entire team. We wanted to create a tower comprised of moments of connection whether it be to your own living space, the neighborhood, the harbor or the ever-evolving skyline.”

Complementing the luxury homes is an equally extensive suite of amenities. Residents will have access to a 63-foot indoor swimming pool, four padel courts, several children’s playrooms, a BondST restaurant, and, most notably, a jazz club.

The addition of a music venue is notable given that Greg Williamson, one of Douglas Elliman’s brokers managing sales at the building, is an established figure in the live music industry.

According to the New York Post, Williamson has served for the past decade as executive producer of the annual Love Rocks concert at the Beacon Theatre, a star-studded event that has featured performers including Paul Simon, James Taylor, Alicia Keys, and John Mayer.

Williamson, a Brooklyn Heights native, told the Post the project is “personal” to him, adding that it will be “one of the nicest buildings ever erected in the borough.”

“It’s going to be the nicest project to ever come to Brooklyn,” Williamson told the Post. “And probably one of the nicest projects to ever come to New York City. Unbelievably spacious layouts, panoramic views and world-class amenities.”

One Montague Place will be surrounded by scenic tree-lined blocks, with easy access to dining, retail, cultural institutions, green space, and public transit.

Sales at One Montague Place are expected to launch in 2027, with completion slated for 2029. Prices are projected to start at roughly $5.9 million, according to the Post.

RELATED:

The post 50-story Brooklyn Heights mixed-use tower with 136 apartments and a jazz club breaks ground first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

LP Building Solutions’ role in the evolution of engineered wood products and American homebuilding is the focus of a new USA Today documentary segment, part of the publisher’s “America 250” series on U.S. industry and innovation.

The segment, which premieres July 2 on USAToday.com, traces how LP’s development and commercialization of oriented strand board (OSB) and other engineered wood products have influenced residential construction over the past five decades, according to a company announcement.

From plywood to OSB as a structural standard

Founded in 1972, Nashville-based LP helped move the market from plywood to OSB structural panels, opening North America’s first OSB mill in 1979. At the time, plywood still dominated U.S. homebuilding.

OSB, made from smaller, fast-growing trees, offered a more uniform and resource-efficient alternative aimed at improving consistency in panel performance. Over time, OSB moved from a niche product to a standard in residential construction and now accounts for the majority of the structural panel market, the company said.

LP later extended its engineered wood platform into exterior products with the launch of LP SmartSide Trim & Siding in 1997, giving builders and remodelers a wood-based option that competes with fiber cement, vinyl and traditional wood siding systems.

Why this matters for builders

For production builders and regional operators, the America 250 feature underscores how material choices have shifted in response to labor, cost and performance pressures. Engineered wood systems such as OSB have become central to framing, sheathing and exterior assemblies as builders look for predictable performance, manufacturing scale and compatibility with evolving energy and fire codes.

The spotlight on LP also comes as builders continue to face supply and demand imbalances. Realtor.com estimated a nationwide housing shortfall of more than 4 million homes in 2025, while the National Association of Home Builders reported that the median age of owner-occupied homes reached 42 years in 2024. That combination points to sustained demand for both new-home starts and major renovation work, keeping pressure on building products manufacturers to support higher volumes and more specialized applications.

“Our focus has been on improving how homes are built and how they perform,” LP Chief Executive Officer Jason Ringblom said in the announcement. “We see sustained demand for solutions that advance innovation, sustainability and performance across the industry, and we will continue to meet that demand.”

Product innovation and code-driven demand

LP’s recent product development has centered on both exterior cladding and code-aligned structural solutions. In 2025, the company was granted 21 patents and added products such as the LP SmartSide ExpertFinish Naturals Collection Siding, aimed at giving builders more prefinished options while reducing jobsite labor.

The company also advanced LP BurnGuard Fire-Retardant-Treated OSB, described as the first commercialized FRT OSB certified to meet International Building Code and International Residential Code definitions for fire-retardant-treated wood structural panels. As more jurisdictions tighten fire and wildland-urban interface (WUI) requirements, builders are increasingly weighing FRT options for roof decks, exterior walls and multifamily assemblies.

For homebuilders, the growth of FRT OSB and integrated structural systems reflects a broad trend toward solutions that combine structural performance, moisture management, energy efficiency and code compliance in fewer steps. That can help mitigate skilled labor constraints and reduce cycle times on larger communities.

Emphasis on carbon and resource efficiency

Beyond product performance, LP used the America 250 spotlight to reinforce its positioning around carbon and forest management — an area that is drawing more attention from institutional land developers, public builders and ESG-focused capital.

In its 2025 sustainability report, LP said carbon-negative products accounted for 91% of its North American net sales in 2024. The company also reported a 50% reduction in Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions intensity by net sales since 2019.

LP said its manufacturing model emphasizes resource efficiency and long-term forest stewardship, framing these practices as longstanding operational priorities rather than new initiatives. The company operates more than 20 manufacturing facilities across North and South America and reported $2.7 billion in revenue in 2025 with about 4,300 employees.

Positioning ahead of the semiquincentennial

USA Today’s America 250 series is designed to highlight how U.S. businesses have contributed to economic and technological progress since the signing of the Declaration of Independence, ahead of the nation’s 250th anniversary in 2026. LP’s inclusion places residential construction materials alongside better-known sectors like automotive, technology and manufacturing in the run-up to the semiquincentennial.

For builders, developers and construction executives, the feature is another signal that building materials innovation and housing supply constraints are part of a broader national conversation about economic growth, infrastructure and sustainability. It also reinforces that code shifts, carbon reporting expectations and productivity pressures will likely continue to shape product specifications on job sites.

The LP segment is available on USAToday.com as part of the America 250 documentary series. More information on LP’s products and sustainability reporting is available at LPCorp.com.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Mike Kortas is stepping into the mortgage servicing space with the launch of evoLend — a servicer approved for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae loans that’s initially designed to give NEXA Lending loan officers a competitive advantage in borrower relationships. 

In an interview with HousingWire, Kortas — the founder and CEO of NEXA — said the traditional mortgage servicing model often disconnects LOs from borrowers after a loan is funded, limiting their visibility into future refinance and payoff opportunities.

“Every time a loan is sold to somebody, the loan officer is getting sold out by their company, because the servicing is now being done by somebody else,” Kortas said. “Now our loan officers will be able to be involved in the servicing.”  

evoLend plans to offer mortgage servicing tools and borrower data to help LOs stay connected with clients during the life of a loan. Kortas also said future integrations could give NEXA LOs access to servicing information and payoff data, subject to regulatory and compliance requirements.

Leadership

Tammy Richards has been appointed CEO at evoLend, where she will oversee technology, operational infrastructure and the servicing platform. When asked whether Richards will retain her position as NEXA’s chief strategy officer, Kortas said that the decision is “still in transition” but that Richards will “focus on this new venture.”

“evoLend is about giving loan officers access to the information and infrastructure they have historically been separated from after closing,” Richards said in a statement. “This company is being built intentionally, with compliance, technology, and long-term loan officer value at the center.”

Todd Bitter, national director of sales at NEXA, explained that in the company’s nondelegated correspondent business format, it funds the loans while lenders handle the underwriting. Typically, lenders then buy the loans off NEXA’s warehouse line and retain the servicing.

“That’s how it’s always worked in this industry,” Bitter said. “But we basically said, ‘Here’s a servicing company, and we want our loans to be able to be serviced by this company. If you want to do business with us, we would appreciate that.’ Some of them are going to be a subservicing agreement, and some of them are going to be servicing fully.”

Competition 

Kortas is launching evoLend amid a competitive landscape for servicing, which has led to several recent transactions: Rocket Companies and Mr. Cooper Group; Bayview Asset Management and Guild Mortgage; and the attempts by United Wholesale Mortgage and CrossCountry Mortgage to acquire Two Harbors Investment Corp.

“Not every lender is going to allow us to service the loans, but some are, because they’re thinking this is their way to get more volume from NEXA,” Bitter added.

Kortas plans to make evoLend available to other brokers, LOs and companies in the future. He said evoLend is pursuing multiple business models depending on the lender or investor involved in a loan.

In cases where evoLend owns the mortgage servicing rights (MSRs), the company would also service the loan, giving it direct access to borrower information throughout the life of the mortgage.

If another lender retains the servicing rights, Kortas said evoLend could instead act as the subservicer, handling the day-to-day servicing while the lender continues to own the asset.

In situations where evoLend neither owns nor services the loan, the company plans to rely on technology integrations to receive servicing data through application programming interfaces (APIs). Kortas said that would allow LOs to monitor payoff activity and remain engaged with borrowers even when another company services the loan.

Partnerships 

While Kortas says that no companies have officially signed on, he anticipates that Pennymac will be the first company to work with evoLend. Other companies are in the works too, but “nothing has been finalized,” he added. 

“I have enough cash reserves to service many billions of dollars,” he said. “Our goal is likely $2 billion year one and then grow it from there. But we certainly will not be thinking small long term.”

The addition of a new company under Kortas’s belt does not mean a change for NEXA’s business model, he said.

evoLend is not Kortas’s only business pursuit this year. He also acquired the for-sale-by-owner platform FSBO.com through an ownership group co-led by strategic partner Brad Rice, the CEO of real estate marketplace Homepie and of Amerifund Home Loans.

Kortas said at the time of that announcement that while NEXA does not own FSBO.com, the platform will benefit NEXA due to lead discounts and lead aggregation. Similarly, Kortas confirmed to HousingWire on Thursday that he alone owns evoLend and that it will operate independently, not under NEXA’s ownership.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

For over a century the Georgia-based brokerage Blanchard & Calhoun Real Estate Co. has continued to serve consumers in the Augusta area all while navigating recessions, record high interest rates, the rise of the internet, the COVID-19 pandemic housing market, the commission lawsuits and the current wave of massive consolidation hitting the housing industry.

Tom Blanchard, the firm’s president, attributes the continued success of his family’s firm to its focus on community and relationships. 

“I think what has helped us survive over the years, especially in previous waves of consolidation, is just sticking to who we are, knowing our business and doing our best to be a source of information that people want to engage with,” Blanchard said. “We just focus on sticking to the core of the business and surrounding ourselves with the best people we can. There are thousands of challenges out there and in real estate right now it feels a bit like we are under attack with all of the lawsuits and scrutiny. But, I think it’s a people business and having good people is what helps local, regional independents like us survive.” 

Blanchard believes the current rise of the “mega-brokerage” provides his firm with an opportunity to home in on what differentiates it from some of the national brands, but he knows this task won’t be easy.

“As everyone keeps consolidating, I don’t think our job is going to get any easier. It might continue to get harder for us independents, but if you build a company with a good reputation, that is always valuable, so we’re going to focus on keeping things that way for Blanchard & Calhoun,” he said. 

Competing with the big dogs

In the quest to stay competitive, Blanchard said he is focusing on making sure that the company is bringing in the right people and systems to support existing agents and continue to grow the brokerage. 

“If we’ve got good folks, who can effectively help consumers buy or sell a home, and the systems behind them help them become more efficient, collaborative and productive, then the sky is the limit,” Blanchard said. “As long as our agents continue to put themselves in positions to grow their business, making sure they are involved with community projects, then things will be positive. There is no question that the big firms are getting bigger, but we have always had to compete against bigger players.” 

The network effect

In addition to ensuring he has the right people at the brokerage to best serve clients, during challenging times, Blanchard said it is important to lean on other relationships in the industry. Due to this, he said he is glad to be part of the Leading Real Estate Companies of the World network, as it provides him with a network of other top-independent brokerages to discuss and identify best practices and strategies with. 

“They are a great resource for a company like ours,” Blanchard said of the LeadingRE network. “They add value to our ability to refer folks moving out of our area to other trusted professionals, but they also do a really good job of keeping us on the forefront of best practices and tools. There are some really successful companies and leaders in the network and it is really neat to just be around them and listen.” 

Navigating the noise

With so much noise in the real estate industry right now, Blanchard said he feels it is most important to remain centered on the consumer and their needs and concerns. 

“We are focused on staying on top of questions our consumers may ask us — lately that has been a lot of questions around commissions and compensation — and making sure that our agents are very professional and [provide] great resources for buyers,” he said. 

Currently, Blanchard said he and his team are working to help consumers navigate a relatively flat housing market and ongoing affordability challenges. Looking at the second half of the year, he said the company, which also functions as a developer, is excited about several new construction listings coming online soon.

“We’ve been looking at ways to help with housing affordability and some of that comes down to [bringing] more housing product to the market, so new lots and houses to the market, in a place where this is challenging, is really exciting and our agents are looking forward to bringing these to buyers in our market,” Blanchard said.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The U.S. economy added just 57,000 jobs in June, according to data released Thursday by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Combined with a downward revision by a combined 72,000 jobs for the April and May jobs data, the numbers paint an underwhelming picture of the labor market, which was expected to add over 110,000 jobs in June. 

Despite this, the three-month average payroll gain is 111,000, which is stronger than any three-month average recorded in 2025. 

“The labor market still looks steadier than it did last year, but the momentum is less convincing than it looked a month ago,” Sam Williamson, a senior economist at First American, said in a statement.

The unemployment rate fell slightly in June to 4.2%, down from 4.3% a month prior, with a total of 7.1 million people unemployed. Economists attributed the decline to a shrinking labor force. 

“The number of unemployed people fell by 213,000, but the labor force contracted by 720,000, led by a pullback among prime-age workers. In other words, the lower unemployment rate reflected fewer people working or actively looking for work, rather than stronger underlying labor demand,” Williamson said. 

chart visualization

Employment trended upwards in professional and business services (+36,000 jobs), social assistance (+25,100 jobs) and health care (+21,500 jobs), while the leisure and hospitality sector lost 61,000 jobs. Economists said the decline in leisure and hospitality employment was a surprise given that the U.S. is currently hosting the World Cup. 

The construction sector added 11,000 jobs in June, however residential building construction lost 2,900 jobs and residential specialty trade contractors lost 5,700 jobs. The non-residential specialty trade contractor segment, however, gained 14,100 jobs in June. The real estate and rental and leasing segment lost 1,200 jobs with the majority of these losses coming specifically from real estate, which lost 1,300 jobs in June. 

“The sector details showed pockets of strength, but not enough breadth to confirm a broader hiring breakout. On the goods side, construction was the relative bright spot, adding 11,000 jobs, driven by non-residential categories, especially specialty trade contractors,” Williamson said.

chart visualization

For the housing industry, Williamson said the June jobs numbers keep things steady, but don’t provide any sort of boost. 

“Positive job growth still supports incomes and buyer confidence, but weaker participation and uneven sector gains do not point to the kind of labor-market momentum that would quickly unlock demand,” he said. “Life-driven moves, modest affordability improvement and rebalancing inventory should continue to support activity, but mortgage rates remain the primary constraint. That points to a gradual rebalancing, rather than a rapid rebound.”

As for what the Federal Reserve may decide to do at its meeting later this month, economists believe the report may cause the Fed to rethink a potential rate hike. 

“Overall, this report shows a job market that is a bit shakier than the May data had indicated, but inflation still remains too high,” Mike Fratantoni, the senior vice president and chief economist of the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA), said in a statement. “MBA expects the Federal Reserve will keep the federal funds rate unchanged through the remainder of this year, but anticipates that their next move will be a hike in early 2027.”

For those still hoping for a rate cut, Williamson added that the “lower unemployment rate, low jobless claims and steady wage growth do not make a strong case for near-term cuts.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Every few years, an elite institution announces that the American Dream is over.

This time, the argument comes dressed as housing analysis. Middle-class homeownership, we are told, was not a durable feature of American life but a historical accident. A temporary postwar phenomenon, made possible by cheap land, federal mortgage support, rising wages and a building boom that cannot be repeated.

It sounds sophisticated, but it is also dangerously incomplete.

The American Dream is not dead.

It has been priced out of some markets, regulated out of others, and politically strangled in many of the places that now claim to mourn its disappearance. But in the parts of America still willing to build, adapt, finance, entitle and grow, the dream remains very much alive.

The mistake is simple: Harvard is confusing a broken geography with a broken country. No serious person should minimize today’s affordability crisis. Mortgage rates, insurance, property taxes, construction costs, land prices, and wage pressures have made ownership harder for young families. The monthly payment is real. The math is unforgiving.

But “harder” is not the same as “over.”

Nationally, roughly two-thirds of U.S. households still own their homes. Despite volatility, that rate remains broadly within the band the country has occupied since the late 1960s. Among households aged 35 to 44, ownership remains above 60%. That is below prior peaks, but it is still a majority – even after one of the sharpest affordability shocks in a generation.

The more honest conclusion is this: middle-class homeownership remains possible where supply, infrastructure, and product innovation meet demand. It is becoming impossible in places that worship scarcity, overregulate land, delay infrastructure, and then act surprised when scarcity drives up costs.

That is not a historical accident. It is a policy choice.

For decades, many of America’s most expensive markets struck a bargain. Protect existing homeowners. Restrict new housing. Slow permitting. Fight density. Limit starter-home product. Preserve neighborhood politics at almost any cost. The result was predictable. Prices rose. Young families were locked out. Builders moved elsewhere. Employers followed talent. Talent followed affordability.

Then the same institutions looked at the wreckage and declared the American Dream dead.

No. The Dream did not die. It moved.

It moved to Texas, the Carolinas, Tennessee, Florida, Arizona, Georgia and the outer rings of major growth markets, where families are still trading rent checks for mortgages. They are still buying new homes and choosing schools, trails, garages, yards, safety, and community over permanent renter status in cities that forgot how to say yes.

That is the blind spot in the national housing conversation. Too many analysts treat Boston, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington as if they were America. They are not. They are important markets, but they are also warnings. They show what happens when economic opportunity and housing production become disconnected.

America has always been a country of movement.

Families moved west. Workers moved to factories. Immigrants moved toward opportunity. Veterans came home and bought homes in new suburbs. The middle class did not achieve ownership because one perfect city made room for everyone. It achieved ownership because the country kept building new places for the next generation to start.

That is still happening. The product has changed. The lot may be smaller. The first home may be a townhome, cottage-lot home, duplex, patio home, or a smaller detached house farther from the old urban core. In some communities, the first step may even be a build-for-rent home that later becomes an ownership home.

That may not look like a 1970s subdivision with a quarter-acre lot and a two-car garage, but the ladder still exists where communities allow it to be built.

The real issue is not whether Americans still want ownership. They do. The real issue is whether local governments, lenders, builders, landowners, and infrastructure providers can build a modern ownership ladder that fits today’s incomes, household formation, and monthly payment realities.

That means more starter product. It means smaller lots where appropriate. It means townhomes, patio homes, duplexes, and right-sized detached homes. It means faster approvals, clearer rules, and infrastructure delivered on a timeline that aligns with demand. It means communities with trails, schools, parks, services, and dignity – not just density for density’s sake. It also means accepting a basic truth: you cannot regulate every attainable option out of existence and then blame capitalism for the price.

The phrase “historical accident” lets too many people off the hook. It frames homeownership as a lucky glitch in American history rather than the result of deliberate systems: land availability, infrastructure investment, mortgage access, job growth, private capital, and large-scale housing production.

Those were not miracles. They were choices. And choices can be made again.

Not everywhere. Not overnight. Not with slogans. But in practical, pro-growth markets, the formula remains clear: entitlement discipline, responsible land development, builder competition, flexible product design, financing capacity, and local governments that understand a simple point, namely that saying yes to homes is not a betrayal of community. It is how communities survive.

The American Dream was never a guarantee that every household could buy any house in any ZIP code at any time. That was never the deal. The deal was better than that.

The deal was mobility. Agency. A first rung. A chance to trade effort for ownership. A chance to move to a place where the math works. A chance to build equity, raise a family, change schools, change cities, and change your life.

That Dream is still alive.

But it is no longer evenly distributed. It increasingly belongs to the places willing to earn it. So the question is not whether middle-class homeownership was a historical accident. The question is whether today’s leaders have the courage to recreate the conditions that made it possible: buildable land, infrastructure, capital, reasonable regulation and housing products designed for real households rather than for political theater.

Harvard sees the Dream vanishing because it is looking backward at the markets that stopped building.

Look forward. Look south. Look west. Look at the communities still growing, still permitting, still welcoming families, still solving for the monthly payment, still creating the next front door.

The American Dream did not die. It simply left the places that stopped making room for it.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

A coalition of consumer, housing and civil rights organizations is asking federal regulators to investigate Compass International Holdings’s new agreements with multiple listing services (MLS), arguing the deals expand off-MLS “pocket listing” networks that harm competition and fair housing, according to a July 1 letter to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ).

A group of advocacy organizations led by the Consumer Federation of America sent a letter Tuesday to FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson and Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche, urging the agencies to open an investigation into a set of recently announced data and access agreements between Compass and several MLSs.

The groups argue the arrangements appear designed to bolster private or “off-market” listing networks that keep homes out of traditional public MLS distribution during key marketing periods. They say that structure reduces transparency for buyers and sellers, weakens price competition and can create steering incentives that favor large brokerages and their agents.

In April 2026, Compass reached a deal with Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) to expand MRED’s Private Listing Network nationwide, according to the letter, citing public reporting. Subsequent arrangements have reportedly been struck with Bright MLS, Realtracs and MLS/CLAW.

Private listing systems allow homes to be marketed to a limited pool of agents and buyers rather than broadly across MLSs and public portals. The letter notes that such listings often circulate within a brokerage first, giving the listing firm a better chance to represent both buyer and seller on the same transaction. The advocacy groups contend that while this can increase revenue and market share for large firms, sellers may realize lower sale prices and many buyers may never see available homes, a concern in a low-inventory market.

Civil rights concerns raised

The signatories also raise civil rights concerns, pointing to Zillow research on MRED’s existing Private Listing Network in the Chicago metro that found homes in majority-white neighborhoods were disproportionately marketed through private channels compared with homes in majority non-white areas. They warn that limiting who can see listings may lead to selective exclusion of protected classes and “digital redlining” if not addressed. Zillow, who put together the study, is currently suing MRED and Compass over an alleged antitrust conspiracy to withdraw MRED’s listing feed from Zillow. 

The organizations frame the Compass-MLS deals against what they describe as the brokerage’s growing market power. Compass completed its acquisition of Anywhere Real Estate Inc. in January 2026, combining two large national brokerages in a merger that had already attracted scrutiny from some lawmakers. The letter notes that Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ron Wyden previously raised antitrust concerns about the deal, and a subsequent letter from Warren, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and others questioned its approval process.

The letter concludes by urging federal enforcers to ensure that dominant firms do not use consolidation and exclusive listing practices to “monopolize access to the American Dream” at a time of severe housing unaffordability. It is signed by the Consumer Federation of America, American Economic Liberties Project, Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund, Consumer Action, Demand Progress Education Fund, National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low-income clients), Rise Economy and Woodstock Institute.

Compass did not immediately return HousingWire’s request for comment on the letter.

This article was written by Brooklee Han and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

With warm weather and no state income tax, Florida makes for a prime destination to purchase property. Yet, Florida’s burgeoning real estate market faces a growing problem of deed and property fraud, magnified by the development of AI and the state’s large population of vulnerable individuals, such as senior citizens. This has led some to name South Florida the “title fraud capital of the world.” 

According to 2025 statistics, the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center received over 12,000 real estate-related complaints, representing losses exceeding $275 million. These numbers reflect a profound problem in the United States and Florida that will only become more complicated as AI tools further develop, making deed fraud easier.

Methods to watch out for

Savvy fraudsters use publicly available information and AI tools to perpetrate their schemes, often targeting the most vulnerable property owners. Nonresident property owners, property owners over the age of 65 and owners in financial distress are the primary targets of deed and title fraud schemes, including schemes that utilize AI. 

AI deed fraud can affect any property owner, but fraudsters often focus on properties that are easier to exploit. Common targets include vacant homes, properties in blighted areas, homes that are not actively maintained, properties with delinquent taxes, properties free of liens and properties owned by individuals who do not live nearby.

If you or someone you know is part of a vulnerable population, it is especially important to stay up to date on common AI fraud methods. The most shocking of these methods is “Deepfake” impersonation and voice cloning. These tools have been used to replicate a person’s likeness to trick property owners into revealing sensitive personal information or signing fraudulent deeds or documents. 

AI tools are also used by fraudsters to forge signatures, deeds, closing documents and identification cards that would typically pass inspection by the naked eye. Other fraudsters will launch automated “phishing” and malware attacks through AI-generated, personalized emails and phone calls, which can give them access to passwords and financial information, making fraudulent deed transfers much easier. If a real estate transaction or communication feels suspicious, be sure to do your due diligence before proceeding.

Void vs. voidable deeds and legal action

Florida property owners face different levels of legal strife depending on the sophistication of the AI deed fraud method used by a fraudster. Deeds that are procured by fraud or forgery fall into one of two categories: “void” or “voidable.” 

Category 1: Void deeds

A deed that is void (or void ab initio) is one where the deed is void at its inception. When a fraudster uses AI tools to forge a deed or signature on a deed, that deed is void from the start. Void deeds do not create legal title in the fraudster or anyone to whom the fraudster conveys title. 

For an original property owner to recover the same title and rights to the property that existed before the fraud, the property owner must take legal action to “quiet title” in the property. While seemingly simple, this legal action may prove costly to the property owner who hopes to recover title to his or her property. 

Category 2: Voidable deeds

Alternatively, when a fraudster utilizes an AI Deepfake or phishing scheme to trick a property owner into conveying a facially valid deed, that deed is considered “voidable.” A voidable deed requires quick action because it may technically convey legal title to the property and provide protection to unsuspecting later purchasers of the property. 

The distinction makes legal recovery immensely more complicated and could prevent the original property owner from reacquiring title to the property. In some cases, fraudsters use an AI scheme to induce the transfer of title and subsequently sell the property to a bona fide purchaser, leaving the original property owner and an unsuspecting buyer at odds over the same property. The bona fide purchaser may have legal protections with respect to the property despite also being a victim of fraud themselves. 

This demonstrates the importance of proactivity in defending against AI deed fraud and protecting proper legal title in Florida. It is not uncommon to see litigation in which an unsuspecting purchaser obtains title to a property he or she purchased from someone who acquired it through fraud. In many of those instances, a court must determine who is the “least innocent party.”

Proactive protective actions to take

Florida property owners should be proactive and vigilant in protecting their property. Anyone purchasing a property in Florida should opt to buy owner’s title insurance, which typically requires a one-time payment at closing and can cover legal fees and financial losses arising from fraudulent title activity. Moreover, every Florida property owner should opt into their county’s free property alert service, which alerts property owners to attempted changes to their title 

In South Florida, Broward County is at the forefront of the ever-evolving fight against deed fraud. Specifically, in Broward County, Mila Schwartzreich, General Counsel and Director of Administration for the Office of the Broward County Property Appraiser Marty Kiar, has noted that: 

“Timing is key. The first step South Florida property owners should take is signing up for the Broward County Property Appraiser’s Owner Alert system. After that, vulnerable property owners and their family members should stay vigilant for alerts. If an alert is received reflecting an ownership change they did not make, notify our office immediately for our Crimes Against Property Team to investigate.” 

Limiting deed and property fraud takes a focused effort from property owners, their families, local government agencies, and real estate professionals. Florida property owners should start making this effort as soon as possible. 

Evan Rosenberg is a Florida-based attorney who concentrates his practice on complex real estate and commercial litigation matters in state and federal courts. Ethan Marquis, a summer associate with the firm, assisted with the preparation of this article.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The mortgage market is producing inconsistent credit decisions on borrower profiles that it will encounter with increasing frequency. Borrowers aged 60 to 69 are currently 1.5% more likely to be rejected for a mortgage than younger applicants. Those over 70 face a 2.7% higher denial rate. These numbers don’t reflect elevated credit risk. They reflect a measurement framework designed for a different borrower population and haven’t been updated to account for how wealth is held in retirement.

The numbers behind that population aren’t small. U.S. retirement assets reached $49.1 trillion at the end of 2025. A record 4.2 million Americans turned 65 that same year. The tools being used to evaluate this segment of the purchase and refinance market are producing results that don’t hold up under scrutiny. 

When sound financial planning looks like a liability

Conventional underwriting was built on a correlation that held for most of the 20th century: income flow and financial strength moved together. Document the salary, run the DTI, and the framework will tell you something meaningful about repayment capacity. For retirees, that correlation breaks down.

Strategic drawdown is the entire point of retirement portfolio management. Retirees take only what they need in a given period to manage tax exposure, preserve capital and maintain flexibility. The result is that their documented income often bears little relationship to their full financial position. A borrower with $1.2 million in liquid assets drawing $2,500 a month looks considerably worse on paper than a salaried employee earning $80,000 a year, despite carrying a fraction of the repayment risk.

Rate and price dynamics have deepened that distortion. DTI ratio was the primary reason cited for mortgage denials in 35% of cases in 2024, up from 29% in 2018. For most borrowers, that reflects actual debt load. For retirees drawing down strategically, it reflects documented income that understates their financial position, a different problem producing the same outcome.

The rate environment has made this worse. Social Security income that cleared DTI on a $400,000 loan in 2020 supports considerably less borrowing at 6% or 7%. Median home equity for Americans 65 and older has risen roughly 47% since 2019, which means the loans retirees need have grown while the income the framework recognizes has contracted. The measurement hasn’t drifted slightly off. For a significant share of this population, it’s producing the opposite of an accurate credit read.

One assumption, two markets

Asset depletion lending addresses this directly, and its basic mechanics are worth understanding clearly because the details are where the market diverges. 

Rather than requiring traditional income documentation, lenders calculate a synthetic monthly income figure from verified liquid assets. Eligible assets, including brokerage accounts, retirement accounts and liquid savings, form the qualifying base. Illiquid holdings are excluded. Retirement accounts are haircut by roughly 30% to account for taxes and withdrawal costs, and the adjusted total is amortized across a set time horizon to produce a synthetic monthly income figure. That figure then runs through standard DTI analysis the same way employment income would.

The methodology is well established. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have provisions for asset-based qualification, which means it carries agency-level acknowledgment. What creates the market divergence is a single variable: the time horizon used to amortize the asset base.

GSE guidelines divide assets over 360 months. On a $1.2 million asset base, after the standard retirement account discount, that produces roughly $2,300 per month in qualifying income. At current prices and rates, that number closes very few loans. 

Non-QM lenders typically use a 60-month horizon. The same asset base generates approximately six times that monthly figure. The underwriting rationale is identical in both cases. So is the borrower. Yet one assumption leads to denial, while the other leads to approval.

This is the mechanism behind a pattern that, from the outside, looks like inconsistent standards. Two lenders evaluating the same retiree applicant can reach opposite conclusions without either making a technical error. Both are operating under frameworks that define the qualifying borrower population differently.  Non-QM rates do run slightly higher than conventional, but for a borrower who qualifies comfortably under one formula and doesn’t qualify at all under the other, the rate differential is rarely what determines the outcome. 

What closing the gap requires

Originator awareness is part of the picture, but the structural work sits elsewhere. Lenders without non-QM asset depletion in their product set are leaving this population unserved, regardless of how well their loan officers understand the mechanics. That’s a product and investor infrastructure issue, and training alone won’t close it.

The secondary market component is worth naming directly: asset depletion loans need consistent investor appetite to scale, and non-QM execution still carries pricing and disposition variability that conventional channels don’t. That’s a reasonable operational consideration, not a reason to avoid the product, but it shapes how lenders need to think about building capacity here.

The agency side of the equation is also in motion. The 360-month horizon is a policy choice, and as the retiree borrower population grows, the case for revisiting it strengthens. The defined contribution shift accelerates that pressure considerably. As defined-benefit pensions continue their decline and 401(k)-based retirement becomes the dominant model, the accumulator profile becomes the default borrower, and qualification frameworks will need to reflect this.

The denial rates for older borrowers do not reflect actual differences in credit performance. They’re tracking a documentation standard built for earned income and applied without adjustment to accumulated wealth. The tools to evaluate these borrowers accurately already exist, and the market pressure to use them consistently is building. The borrower population driving that pressure is moving in only one direction.

By Eric Bernstein, President and Co-founder of LendFriend Mortgage
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Clayton Home Building Group confirmed that its Southeast U.S. powerhouse operator, Mungo Homes has acquired Columbia, S.C.-based McGuinn Homes, a four-decade-old regional builder whose rise in HousingWire’s Homebuilder Rankings reflected a carefully executed growth strategy centered on attainable homeownership, disciplined operations and customer focus.

In announcing the acquisition, Clayton described the combination as built on a “platform of shared values,” emphasizing attainable homeownership, team-member experience, and community stewardship rather than financial engineering alone.

Geoff Shiley, CEO of Mungo Homes, in a provided statement, called the combination “a natural fit,” noting that McGuinn had built “a strong reputation, a values-driven culture, and a genuine commitment to the customers and communities they serve.” He added that those priorities “are the very priorities that have guided Mungo for decades.”

On its face, the acquisition appears to be another successful regional builder joining a much larger enterprise.

Looked at through the lens of the industry’s accelerating consolidation, however, the transaction says something considerably larger.

Over the past two weeks, HousingWire TBD has explored Berkshire Hathaway’s planned acquisition of Taylor Morrison through the themes of governance, scale, vertical integration and patient capital.

The acquisition of McGuinn Homes, while much smaller in financial terms, offers perhaps our clearest window yet into what those forces look like from the seller’s perspective.

“The same company that would buy a small builder in Columbia, South Carolina, bought Taylor Morrison in the same time frame,” McGuinn Homes founder Wade McGuinn said Wednesday in an exclusive interview. “If you don’t think it’s a tsunami … if you’re below No. 50, you really need to think about your family’s future and your company’s future.”

That observation may prove to be the most telling and impactful takeaway from the transaction. This is not just the story of Berkshire Hathaway buying another builder. Rather, it’s the story of one respected founder discerning that the competitive landscape itself has changed.

The view from below the Top 50

McGuinn does not describe the sale as a necessity-driven exit. The opposite. Over the past seven years, McGuinn Homes transformed itself from an approximately $80 million builder into a roughly $200 million enterprise, growing annual production from about 200 homes to nearly 1,000 while sharpening its focus on attainable, market-rate housing across South Carolina.

Yet even as the company accelerated its own growth, McGuinn became convinced that the industry’s economics were changing in ways that would eventually challenge even successful independent builders.

“M&A, which is creating scale, gets to a point where they can just price everybody left out of the market,” he said. “Not everybody’s going to be acquired, but everybody is going to go away. … I’m not talking about next year, but if you’re doing a strategic 10-year plan and you’re a builder, you need to figure out what that’s saying to you.”

Whether you’d agree with that conclusion or not, it harmonizes with a question simmering across residential development and homebuilding.

As larger builders, global housing companies, and institutional investors continue to assemble broader operating platforms, regional builders increasingly compete not only for homebuyers but also for land, labor, trade partners, distribution relationships, and capital. Scale is becoming less about bragging rights and more about operating leverage and navigating a changing ecosystem of partners, trades, manufacturers, land sellers, and financial stakeholders.

If Berkshire Hathaway’s pursuit of Taylor Morrison illustrates scale at the industry’s largest end, the McGuinn acquisition demonstrates that the same strategic logic is working its way through the regional builder landscape as well.

Seven years preparing for one decision

Contrary to what Thursday’s announcement might suggest, McGuinn did not wake up one morning and decide to sell.

The process began seven years ago after hearing Whelan Advisory, LLC. founder and CEO Margaret Whelan deliver a keynote presentation about technology – not as software, but as the force that ultimately enables scale.

“She wasn’t talking about technology,” McGuinn recalled. “She was talking about the technology of scale. How technology affects scale, and how scale is going to change the industry.”

That presentation led not to an immediate sale, but to a recapitalization that fueled McGuinn Homes’ next phase of growth. By the time the company returned to market this year, it had become one of the Southeast’s stronger privately held builders.

According to McGuinn, the company executed multiple confidentiality agreements, received several formal offers and narrowed the field through a competitive process. Remarkably, price ranked fifth among the family’s decision criteria.

“We had five criteria for sale, and the fifth one was price,” McGuinn said. “We wanted culture. We wanted to protect our people… We wanted to get a fair price for the company, but culture was very, very important. Our people are very important.”

That philosophy closely mirrors the acquisition framework Clayton executives have publicly articulated over the past decade.

“Our shared values of attainable homeownership, world-class team member experience and giving back to the people and communities we serve made this partnership an exceptional fit,” Clayton Home Building Group CEO Keith Holdbrooks said in announcing the transaction. “Together, we’ll expand access to affordable homes while serving as a united force for good in the communities where we build.”

For McGuinn, that alignment became tangible during an in-person meeting with Clayton executive Michael Rutherford.

“He said, ‘We’re the right people, we’re the right culture, we’re the right fit, we respect you guys, and we want to do this deal,’” McGuinn recalled. “They did every single thing they said they would do.”

Building platforms, not absorbing companies

During the process, Clayton introduced Mungo Homes into the transaction. Rather than maintaining McGuinn Homes as a stand-alone operating company indefinitely, the business ultimately will become part of the Mungo Homes platform one of Clayton’s largest site-built homebuilding operations across the Southeast.

“This is an exciting and strategic combination, and one we see as a natural fit,” Shiley said. “Over the past 40 years, McGuinn has built something special with a strong reputation, a values-driven culture and a genuine commitment to the customers and communities they serve.”

Historically, large public homebuilder acquisitions often resulted in the acquired company’s identity gradually disappearing inside the parent organization.

Clayton’s site-built strategy has generally followed a different path: preserving leadership continuity, maintaining local operating capability and integrating companies into broader regional platforms while seeking to retain the entrepreneurial culture that made them successful in the first place.

McGuinn says that mattered.

“The legacy wasn’t in my name,” he said. “The legacy… is what this company created for generations for my family, and what we did in the community.”

His son Kelly McGuinn, a veteran homebuilding executive, will remain with Mungo in a senior operating role.

A seller’s market unlike any before

Margaret Whelan believes the McGuinn transaction reflects a much broader shift in homebuilding M&A.

“The M&A markets are alive and well,” Whelan said. “There’s more buyers and sellers. The buyers have more money, more appetite than we’ve ever seen before. They’re coming from more places in the world than we’ve ever seen before… M&A is not going to slow down anytime soon.”

Even more striking, she says, today’s private builders often command valuation multiples above comparable public companies.

“It’s a seller’s market,” she said. “Most of these private builder deals are closing at multiples higher than publics are trading… which is unusual… but it is a function of supply and demand.”

McGuinn’s company, she noted, attracted six serious offers through a structured process before Clayton ultimately emerged as both the highest bidder and the strongest strategic fit.

Perhaps her most telling observation, however, echoes one of the central conclusions emerging from the Berkshire-Taylor Morrison series.

“Scale matters,” Whelan said. “It doesn’t actually matter if you’re public or private.”

She argues that the economics of remaining public have become less compelling than many builders once assumed.

“Going public hasn’t been much fun,” she said, noting that depressed valuations have made public equity a less attractive source of growth capital than many expected.

One regional builder at a time

Builder Advisor Group founder Tony Avila, whose firm has advised on four homebuilder sales to Clayton over the past decade, sees the McGuinn acquisition as another step in a strategy that has been unfolding for years.

“We have been honored to work across the table from Clayton on selling four companies over the past 10 years that have grown substantially with Clayton ownership,” Avila said. “Obtaining scale has been a hallmark of Clayton’s growth strategy both in its manufactured housing business and its production homebuilding investments.”

His observation adds another layer to Berkshire Hathaway’s broader housing strategy. If the pending acquisition of Taylor Morrison represents Berkshire adding one of the country’s premier public homebuilders to its portfolio, the acquisition of McGuinn Homes illustrates the company’s continued deepening of its regional operating platforms.

It’s amassing scale from both directions.

The macro

In conversation, Wade McGuinn offered what may be the most revealing insight.

“The story about Wade McGuinn not very interesting,” he said. “The story combined with the Taylor Morrison idea… that these people racing to the top are creating a scale that the trade partners, the vendors, the suppliers just can’t keep up with… that’s the industry story.”

As Berkshire Hathaway simultaneously expands through Taylor Morrison at the top of the industry and through companies like Mungo Homes across regional markets, the question confronting builders is becoming less about whether consolidation is occurring and more about how it is unfolding.

It is about how they intend to compete in a residential construction landscape increasingly shaped by scale, patient capital and interconnected operating platforms and shared values.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Finance of America (FOA) has closed an all-cash acquisition of reverse mortgage servicing rights from Onity Mortgage Corp., adding roughly 20,000 Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs) with a combined $5.2 billion in unpaid principal balance (UPB) to its portfolio, the companies announced Wednesday.

The deal, disclosed by FOA in an 8-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), transfers Ginnie Mae servicing rights from Onity. Finance of America said in a press release that the acquisition materially expands its servicing footprint and its customer base of homeowners ages 55 and older who use home equity as part of their retirement strategy.

The companies gained approval for the deal from Ginnie Mae in early June. The initial proposal included roughly 40,000 loans with $9.6 billion in UPB, but Ginnie Mae did not grant approval to those terms.

FOA will also acquire Onity’s pipeline of reverse mortgage loans, and Onity will exit the reverse mortgage originations business. Onity expects total proceeds of $70 million to $80 million from the transaction, based on the book value of the assets as of April 30. It expects to use the funds to support growth, reduce debt and for other corporate purposes.

Subservicing agreement solidified

As part of the transaction, Finance of America has retained Onity Mortgage as a subservicer under a three-year agreement. That structure is designed to maintain continuity for borrowers while FOA integrates the portfolio and diversifies its servicing operations with an external partner.

“Completing this transaction represents an important milestone in our growth strategy,” Graham Fleming, CEO of Finance of America, said in a statement. “We are pleased to welcome these customers to our platform while establishing a meaningful servicing relationship with Onity. This acquisition strengthens our market leadership and enhances our ability to deliver innovative reverse mortgage solutions to more American homeowners.”

“We are pleased to complete this transaction with (FOA), which repositions our role in the reverse mortgage market,” said Glen A. Messina, chair, president and CEO of Onity Group. “This strategic transaction establishes a significant subservicing relationship with (FOA), simplifies our business, and enables increased focus on more substantial growth and earnings opportunities. We look forward to our continued partnership with (FOA) and to future opportunities.”

The acquisition comes as more lenders look to scale in reverse mortgages and home equity-based products amid an aging homeowner demographic, high home equity levels, and a purchase and refinance market still constrained by elevated interest rates.

FOA strengthens grasp as Onity pivots

The deal is likely to further strengthen FOA’s position as a leader in reverse mortgage and senior-based lending solutions.

Data published Wednesday by HECMWorld.com and Reverse Market Insight showed the company widened its lead in HECM retail originations leaderboard in the first half of 2026. FOA endorsed nearly 2,500 HECM loans from January through June and currently holds a 23.3% market share.

Last week, the company announced three new hires who will target brand and product alignment. The appointments come roughly six months after FOA hired Angela Tribelli, a former executive at Bloomberg Media, as its chief marketing officer.

For Onity, the sale builds on a recently completed, multistage rebranding effort. The company officially discontinued the PHH Mortgage Corp. and Liberty Reverse Mortgage brands in late March. Last year, Liberty was the fifth-largest HECM originator in the country with 1,166 endorsements, up slightly from 1,125 in 2024.

This article was written by Neil Pierson and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

California has long been synonymous with high taxes, but new fights over who will pay them are exposing a sharper fault line.

The state increasingly reaches for “tax the rich” tools to fund housing and social programs, while anti-tax forces try to constrain those same tools.

California’s tax fight is unfolding under a national spotlight. Lawmakers and advocates are testing how far “tax the rich” politics can go in expensive states. California needs money for affordable housing and social services, yet risks pushing property and wealth taxes so hard that they slow construction or spook investors.

Other high-cost states, such as New York, are experimenting with higher taxes on luxury homes and high-dollar transactions. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul recently signed into law a tax on luxury New York City homes owned by nonresidents.

What California decides on transfer taxes, “mansion” levies and billionaire wealth measures this year could shape how other states pursue politically viable ways to make homes more affordable.

Transfer tax deal in Sacramento

In late June, that tension surfaced in Sacramento in a deal over transfer taxes. California YIMBY and other housing groups backed Assembly Bill 736.

AB 736 would have set a statewide ceiling on local transfer taxes. It would have limited city and county transfer taxes to 1.5% of a property’s sale price. Supporters said the bill would prevent future local taxes from climbing to levels that could discourage transactions and weaken housing production.

The bill advanced alongside a ballot initiative from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. That measure would have sharply limited transfer taxes and tightened rules for local special taxes. It threatened to dramatically reduce local governments’ ability to raise money from property sales.

Instead of going to the November ballot, the association withdrew the initiative after lawmakers crafted a compromise state constitutional amendment for the November ballot. Voters will decide whether to raise the threshold for future local special taxes to two-thirds, as laid out in Proposition 13, passed in 1978, instead of a simple majority.

The California Association of Realtors opposed the taxpayers association’s initiative and AB 736. The group said the bill would have incentivized cities to increase transfer taxes up to the new cap. It supported the compromise, however.

“While the amendment would apply going forward rather than to taxes already in place, it would protect taxpayers by returning the two-thirds threshold to all ballot measures for all local special tax measures,” it wrote in an update to members.

California YIMBY called the defeat of AB 736 a failure but pointed to one upside. The group noted that cities now face a much higher bar to pass new transfer taxes and existing taxes cannot be undone.

The pro-housing group has vowed to continue the push for transfer tax reform. An initial salvo came in a Washington Post opinion written by Michael Manville, a professor of urban planning at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs.

Manville focuses on how Measure ULA – known as the “mansion tax” – was intended to do good but has had a negative impact.

Voters approved ULA in 2022, adding a 4% tax on sales over $5 million. It also imposed a 5.5% tax on sales above $10 million. Supporters promised hundreds of millions annually for homelessness programs and subsidized housing.

“When the tax took effect, higher-end sales plunged and stayed down,” he wrote, based on his own research and a Rand study.

Billionaire wealth tax debate

The statewide fight over taxing billionaires raises similar questions. On November’s ballot, voters will consider a one-time 5% tax on billionaire net worth. The measure applies to residents whose assets exceed $1 billion.

Supporters call it a way to fund health care, education and food assistance. They emphasize that very few taxpayers would pay the levy.

Opponents see another narrow, high-rate tax aimed at a small group. They warn it could encourage avoidance strategies or prompt some billionaires to leave. That, they argue, could destabilize revenue and investment.

Business leaders and taxpayer organizations back countermeasures to limit such taxes. Some proposals would neutralize the billionaire tax if it passes. Others would ban new taxes on personal property and retroactive taxes on accumulated wealth.

These efforts seek to set constitutional limits on how California taxes wealth and savings. Rather than fighting each proposal individually, opponents want durable guardrails.

Housing advocates are trying to balance production concerns with the need for new funding. They support curbing extreme transfer taxes that hit development hardest. Yet they also rely on targeted taxes to finance affordability programs.

Taken together, the transfer-tax negotiations, Los Angeles’s experience with ULA, and the billionaire-tax campaigns show that housing and tax policy are converging. As California searches for ways to finance housing and social services, the design of taxes on property and wealth becomes crucial. Who is taxed, at what rate and with what behavioral effects now sits at the center of the debate.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Shilo, an AI conversation analysis platform for real estate and mortgage teams, has launched 1:1 Coaching, an autonomous AI sales coach that conducts voice-to-voice one-on-one sessions with agents without a manager present, the company announced Tuesday.

The Phoenix-based company says the product builds the coaching agenda from each agent’s own call data, runs the session, summarizes action items and carries that context forward to future meetings. Leaders receive a consolidated report across the team, along with a dashboard showing which agents have completed their sessions. The company said sessions are personalized to each agent based on DISC personality insights.

Shilo positions 1:1 Coaching as a way to extend individualized coaching beyond what a solo human manager can achieve without adding headcount in a market where a human sales manager can cost $80,000 to $120,000 a year.

Industry data underscores the stakes. Citing the National Association of Realtors (NAR), Shilo notes that 87% of real estate agents leave the profession within five years and that teams may waste 40% to 60% of their lead investment on inconsistent call execution. 

Before launch, Shilo said it tested the feature with 200 agents in a beta program. Coaching sessions averaged 13 minutes, which the company cited as a signal that agents engaged in a full conversation rather than quickly clicking through. On internal satisfaction metrics — including enjoyment, likelihood to use again, perceived business impact and perceived personalization — no dimension scored below 7 out of 10, according to the announcement.

“For 20 years, coaching a real estate team meant a manager listening to a handful of calls and giving everyone the same pep talk. It didn’t scale, and it was never personal,” Justin Benson, CEO and co-founder of Shilo, said in the announcement. “1:1 Coaching gives every agent a real coaching session built on how they actually sell – and gives the leader their nights and weekends back. We didn’t build a bot that spits out tips. We built a coach that shows up, remembers you, and holds you to it.”

1:1 Coaching is available now to existing Shilo customers as part of their current plans, the company said. Teams already using Shilo can activate the feature for their agents, while new customers can request a demo.

This article was written by Brooklee Han and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

NAIOP has rebranded as the Commercial Real Estate Development Association (CREDA), a name change the group says better reflects its role as an advocacy and education hub for commercial real estate developers, owners and investors, according to a Wednesday announcement.

The Herndon, Virginia-based trade group, founded in 1967, represents more than 21,000 members through 55 chapters across North America. The organization said the new name clarifies its work to policymakers, business leaders and the public as it continues to focus on commercial real estate development.

The Commercial Real Estate Development Association’s members span a wide range of property types, including multifamily housing, retail, logistics and fulfillment facilities, office, mixed-use projects and data centers, according to the announcement. The rebrand is intended to signal that breadth as capital and development continue to shift between sectors in response to interest-rate policy, e-commerce trends and changing workplace demand.

The association said its mission remains centered on advocacy, research, education and networking. It plans to continue its role as a lobbying voice on land use, tax, environmental and infrastructure policy at the local, state or provincial, and federal levels, while providing professional development and market insight to members.

“For nearly six decades, our association has been the trusted advocate and convening force for commercial real estate,” 2026 association chair Celeste Tanner, who is president and chief development officer of Denver-based Confluent Development, said in an announcement. “While our name is changing, our mission remains the same: advancing commercial real estate development through advocacy, research, education and connections that help our members succeed and strengthen the commercial real estate industry.”

President and CEO Marc Selvitelli said the new name is intended to align more closely with the work members do in communities across North America.

“Our members are creating the housing, workplaces, logistics networks and digital infrastructure that people and businesses depend on every day,” Selvitelli said in the release. “This new name more accurately reflects who our members are, what they do, and the value they bring to communities across North America.”

The rebrand follows a multiyear, research-driven process that included member engagement, stakeholder interviews, focus groups, surveys and strategic planning, the association said.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) remain a minority of total agency originations, but they have reemerged in 2026. This time, independent mortgage banks (IMBs) and more leveraged borrowers are driving a rise in market share, according to Polygon Research.

The analysis, updated Monday by Polygon founder and CEO Val Buresch, found that ARMs rose to 3.34% of agency loans through the first six months of 2026, up from 0.31% during the same period in 2021. A total of 39,166 ARM loans were originated from January to May 2026, compared to 35,591 in all of 2021.

The report relied on Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae mortgage-backed securities (MBS) loan data through May.

“Agency adjustable-rate mortgages are returning to relevance in a mortgage market defined by elevated rates, high home prices, and persistent affordability pressure,” Buresch wrote.

Market changes drastically

In 2021, five banks — Wells Fargo (6,013 loans), JPMorgan Chase (2,374 loans), Truist Bank (1,154 loans), Citizens Bank (762) and U.S. Bank (645) — ranked among the 10 largest agency ARM sellers/issuers.

But year to date in 2026, all of the top 10 sellers/issuers are nonbanks, with the top five positions held by PennyMac Loan Services (4,675 loans), United Wholesale Mortgage (3,786 loans), Freedom Mortgage Corp. (3,283 loans), Rocket Mortgage (2,887 loans), and Lakeview Loan Servicing (2,605 loans).

The Polygon Research analysis ties the shift, among other things, to the ability of IMBs to operate across retail, wholesal and correspondent channels, allowing them to move quickly on new products and scale when demand shifts.

Borrower profiles

From a borrower perspective, ARMs offer lower initial rates that can improve qualification, reduce early payment burden or allow for preservation of monthly cash flow, according to Buresch.

But the 2026 agency ARM borrower appears more stretched than in 2021 across several credit metrics. The average FICO score dropped 29 points to 737, the average loan-to-value rose from 64% to 79%, and the average debt-to-income (DTI) ratio increased 8.2 percentage points to 40.4%.

The near-zero equity segment has grown sharply. In 2021, just 0.4% of agency ARMs had LTVs between 97% and 100%. Year to date, that share is 15.7%, about 39 times higher. Combined with higher DTIs, this points to thinner borrower cushions if incomes fall, home prices soften or payments step up after the first reset.

“One structural feature of ARM pricing compounds that tension: the rate that gets quoted — by lenders, by the media, and in most borrower comparisons — is always the initial rate, regardless of how short the fixed period actually is,” Buresch wrote.

“A 1/1 ARM and a 7/1 ARM may be quoted at similar rates, but their risk profiles for a borrower planning to stay ten years are entirely different. When affordability pressure is the primary driver of product selection, as the 2026 borrower data suggests it is, that gap between the quoted rate and the true cost of the loan over time deserves particular attention.”

This article was written by Flávia Furlan Nunes and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Harvest Capital, through its exclusive partnership with TPG Credit, closed a $600 million recapitalization and expansion facility for Metro Development Group, the companies announced Wednesday.

The transaction, completed at the end of the first quarter of 2026, recapitalizes a portfolio of 10 master-planned communities in Florida and creates a dedicated capital platform to support Metro’s expansion across the Southeast.

Metro Development Group is one of the largest master-planned community developers in the country, with a concentration in fast-growing Florida markets. Access to large-scale, flexible capital has become critical for land developers as higher interest rates, tighter bank standards and persistent lot shortages pressure the residential pipeline.

The $600 million deal builds on the momentum of the Harvest Capital–TPG Credit platform, which has now surpassed $2.1 billion in acquisition and development commitments since its launch in late 2021. Since its inception, the partnership has financed and managed more than 120 projects representing over 45,000 residential lots for developers and homebuilders nationwide, according to the announcement.

“Our ability to execute a $600 million recapitalization for a top national developer reflects the strength of our exclusive relationship with TPG and the trust we’ve earned from premier market participants,” Danny Sparks, CEO of Harvest Capital, said in the release. “We’re proud to provide the capital that enables high-quality residential communities to come to market.”

Metro’s growth plan centers on large-scale master-planned communities in high-demand markets where single-family inventory remains constrained. By structuring a facility that both recapitalizes existing projects and funds expansion, the transaction is designed to allow Metro to accelerate development while managing balance sheet and execution risk.

“Working with Harvest Capital and TPG has given us the kind of capital solution we’ve been looking for – flexible, scaled, and tailored to how our business actually operates,” John Ryan, CEO of Metro Development Group, said. “This facility lets us focus on what we do best, which is creating high-quality master-planned communities, while giving us the confidence to lean into our growth across the Southeast.”

Nonbank capital providers and credit funds have taken a larger role in land and lot financing over the past several years as commercial banks pulled back from acquisition and development lending. For homebuilders and master-planned community sponsors, that shift has made specialty lenders and institutional credit platforms a key source of scale capital.

“We value our partnership with Harvest Capital and their deep expertise in residential land development financing,” said TJ Durkin, managing partner and head of asset-based finance at TPG. “This transaction exemplifies TPG’s commitment to deploying flexible capital solutions that support the residential sector’s critical role in addressing housing supply needs across growing U.S. markets.”

The Harvest Capital–TPG Credit platform focuses on nonrecourse financing solutions for residential land and lot development. The partners said they are targeting strategic relationships with developers in high-growth regions, with an emphasis on attainable housing.

For land developers and homebuilders, the transaction underscores ongoing investor appetite for scaled land and development exposure tied to population-growth markets, even as for-sale housing faces affordability and rate headwinds. Access to large programmatic facilities can help sponsors secure and develop lot pipelines that support future community and vertical construction starts.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Finance of America (FOA) remained the top Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) lender in June 2026 as overall direct retail endorsements increased modestly from May but continued to trail last year’s pace, according to a HECMWorld.com report released Wednesday using data from Reverse Market Insight (RMI).

The top 100 HECM retail lenders logged 2,064 loans in June, up 6% from the prior month but down 9.8% year to date.

FOA closed 481 HECMs in June and has 2,498 through the first half of the year, representing a 23.3% market share. Company volume rose 18.2% from May even as year-to-date production remained 10.8% below the same period last year.

Longbridge Financial ranked second with 407 endorsements in June and 2,101 year to date, good for a 19.7% market share. Its monthly volume increased 14% from May and is essentially flat year to date, down 0.3% from 2025 levels.

Mutual of Omaha Mortgage held the No. 3 spot with 398 June endorsements and 2,567 year to date, equal to 19.3% of the retail market. Its June volume declined 5.9% from May and is down 12.6% year to date.

Fairway Home Mortgage was No. 4 with 112 loans in June and 391 year to date, equating to a share of 5.4%. Fairway’s monthly volume more than tripled from May, up 202.7%, but remains 28.3% lower than the same period last year.

South River Mortgage rounded out the top five with 74 endorsements in June, upping its first-half total to 450, equal to a 3.6% market share. Its production was flat month over month and up 9.5% from last year to date.

The remainder of the top 10 for June included Traditional Mortgage Acceptance Corp. (TMAC), dba GoodLife Home Loans, at 61 endorsements; Guild Mortgage at 49; Plaza Home Mortgage at 37; New American Funding (NAF) at 34; and HighTechLending (HTL) at 32.

NAF and HTL posted some of the strongest monthly gains among all lenders, growing their endorsements by 36% and 39%, respectively, even as volumes for both companies remain down year to date.

Overall, the top 10 lenders accounted for the vast majority of HECM retail volume in June, highlighting continued consolidation in the reverse mortgage market. Smaller lenders and depositories, such as regional banks and credit unions, appear mostly in the lower half of the rankings, with many logging only one or two endorsements for the month.

The report underscores that while HECM demand is stabilizing, higher mortgage rates, tighter Federal Housing Administration (FHA) underwriting scrutiny and ongoing reputational concerns continue to limit growth compared with earlier cycles.

Lenders with established reverse platforms and distribution networks — particularly Finance of America, Longbridge and Mutual of Omaha — are capturing most of the available volume, which may influence how forward-focused lenders evaluate whether to invest in or expand HECM operations.

The HECMWorld report and RMI data covers only direct FHA endorsements and excludes brokered and TPO originations, which RMI tracks in a separate report.

HMBS issuance falls to $456M in June, near historic lows

HECM Mortgage-Backed Securities (HMBS) issuance fell to $456 million in June, down from $500 million in May and well below year-ago levels, according to a New View Advisors analysis of Ginnie Mae data.

The June total was $44 million lower than May and $54 million lower than June 2025’s figure of $510 million. Only 57 pools were issued in June, six fewer than in May. New View said June 2026 ranks as roughly as the 10th lowest month for HMBS issuance since the program began in 2009 and is the second weakest June during that period.

Finance of America was the top issuer in June with $179 million in HMBS, up from $171 million in May. Longbridge followed with $132 million, down $1 million from the prior month. Mutual of Omaha issued $92 million, a $5 million decline from May.

Onity Mortgage Corp.’s issuance dropped sharply to $10 million in June, $38 million less than in May. New View said the decline likely reflects Onity’s sale of HMBS mortgage servicing rights to FOA.

Ginnie Mae/RMF, or “Issuer 42,” again issued no HMBS pools, a trend that began not long after Ginnie assumed control of the RMF portfolio following the lender’s bankruptcy in late 2022.

Original, or first-participation, HMBS production totaled $290 million in June. That was $50 million lower than both May and April — and $60 million below June 2025’s figure of $350 million.

For the first half of 2026, FOA was the top first-participation issuer with $581 million. Longbridge followed with $516 million, Mutual of Omaha with $369 million and Onity with $150 million. Onity did not issue any first-participation pools in June.

Of the 57 pools issued in June, 14 were first-participation pools, 40 were tail pools and three included a mix of first participations and tails. Original pools are backed by first participations in previously uncertificated HECM loans, while tail pools are made up of subsequent participations. Tails do not represent new loans but do reflect additional funds advanced on existing reverse mortgages.

Tail issuance in June totaled $162 million, down from $169 million in May.

New View noted that 12 pools in June had an aggregate size of less than $1 million as issuers utilized Ginnie Mae’s rule allowing pools as small as $250,000. Those small pools represented $6.5 million in unpaid principal balance that might not have been securitized without the flexibility.

Ginnie Mae’s 2023 All Participants Memorandum APM 23-11, which allows multiple participations from the same HECM loan to be pooled more than once in a month, also continued to shape issuance. In June, $62.2 million of participations involved more than one participation from the same loan, including $6.2 million of first participations.

For reverse mortgage lenders and issuers, the June figures underscore that HMBS liquidity remains fragile even with program flexibilities. Persistent low first-participation volume signals muted new HECM production, while concentration among a few large issuers and the absence of Ginnie Mae/RMF issuance keep market risk elevated.

This article was written by Neil Pierson and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

A lawsuit about private listings and NAR’s clear cooperation policy just turned into a fight about harassment victims’ privacy. That turn did not come from the plaintiffs. It came from the National Association of Realtors, and it should give every member pause.

Here is what happened, in order. NAR is defending itself against an antitrust suit brought by Mauricio Umansky’s private listing network, thePLS.com. The network first sued in 2020 over the Clear Cooperation Policy, the rule requiring a listing be submitted to the MLS within one business day of public marketing. NAR was dismissed without prejudice, and thePLS.com refiled in July 2025. The plaintiffs claim CCP “eliminates the ability of listing networks that compete with the NAR-affiliated MLSs to feature listings that are not on the NAR-affiliated MLSs.” NAR counters that the plaintiffs have suffered no “antitrust injury”.

So far, an ordinary commercial dispute over a rule the industry has argued about for years.

Then, on May 19, NAR issued a subpoena to the American Real Estate Association and its co-founder, Compass agent Jason Haber, with a June 18 deadline. Part of it was routine. Communications among ARA, thePLS.com and its Spanish-language sibling, theNLS.com. Part of it was not. The subpoena also demanded every communication tied to the NAR Accountability Project, reaching back to January 1, 2017.

That project has nothing to do with listings. Haber started it in 2023, after sexual misconduct allegations against then-NAR President Kenny Parcell, who resigned in August of that year. It became a channel for people inside NAR who said they had been harassed.

Haber refused. “The NAR Accountability Project shut down before ARA even existed,” he wrote on Instagram. “I’ll leave it to you to ask what its files have to do with a case about private listings.” The records, he said, “include highly sensitive conversations with victims who came forward about harassment inside NAR,” and ARA “is objecting in the strongest possible terms”.

Powerfact: A subpoena is a window into strategy. You can learn what a party fears by reading what it demands.

Let me be fair to NAR first, because fairness is the point.

The Association built the cooperative MLS framework that CCP protects, and that framework is why a buyer in almost any American market can tour nearly every listed home through nearly any agent. That kind of open access does not exist in most of the world. NAR earned credit for it, and the trade press too often forgets to give it.

Credit, though, does not excuse the ask. Discovery is supposed to be tethered to the claims in the case. The claims here are about a listing rule and competition. Years of harassment-victim communications are not evidence about whether CCP restrains trade. Demanding them anyway, from the co-founder of a rival association, looks less like fact-finding and more like a message. Even if a judge trims the request later, members already saw what the first draft wanted.

Powerfact: NAR can win the legal argument and still lose the trust argument. The second one is the one that pays its dues.

The timing makes it worse. NAR is asking members to believe it can be a fair steward at the exact moment stewardship is under the most scrutiny in a generation. CCP’s future, the Compass and Zillow listing war, the neutrality of the MLS itself, all of it runs through the same question. Does this institution use its power with restraint? A subpoena that reaches for harassment files in a listings case is not the answer members were hoping to read.

So, what do you do with this as a working agent?

First, separate the noise from your obligations. The headlines do not change the rulebook. CCP still applies. Market a listing publicly, and you owe it to the MLS within one business day. A courtroom drama is not a loophole.

Second, read past the spin. Both the subpoena and Haber’s statement are public. Whichever side reaches your inbox first will have a tidy narrative. Build your own from the documents instead.

Third, put it to work in the listing conversation. Sellers are hearing fragments about private networks, lawsuits, and Zillow bans. You can be the calm, sourced voice who explains what is actually settled and what is still being fought over. In a confused market, clarity is a competitive advantage.

The lawsuit will resolve the way these usually do, quietly, in a filing most agents never read. The reputation question will not. Members remember how leadership behaves when no one is forcing its hand. NAR still has time to narrow this request and act like the steward it asks members to trust. Whether it does will say more about the association’s future than any verdict.

Darryl Davis, CSP, is the creator of the POWER Program® and a real estate coach, keynote speaker and bestselling author with more than 40 years in the industry. He helps agents and brokers build careers, and lives, worth smiling about. His guiding principle: Serve, don’t sell. Coach, don’t close. Learn more at DarrylSpeaks.com.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

A growing share of Americans now expect financial advisers to handle estate planning, and many would consider switching firms if they do not, according to Trust & Will‘s 2026 Financial Advisor Report.

The survey of 1,500 U.S. adults found that 61% believe estate planning should be part of an adviser’s services, while 68% of clients with advisers say they would consider moving to one that offers it. Among advised Gen Z and millennial clients, roughly 80% say they would consider switching.

The findings, which are based on an online survey conducted from June 4-10 by Talker Research for Trust & Will, underscore a shift in expectations for financial professionals. Younger investors increasingly seek bundled services that include both wealth management and estate planning support.

Growing urgency and importance

The survey is the third installment in Trust & Will’s annual Financial Advisor Report series and compares results to 2025 and 2024 data. “Estate planning has moved from a peripheral offering to a core expectation,” the report states.

Overall, 31.2% of Americans report having a financial adviser, up from 26.9% in 2025. Growth is concentrated among younger adults, reversing a traditional age pattern.

Adviser use among Gen Z rose to 41.7%, up from 28.2% a year earlier. Millennial usage increased from 28.5% to 38.5%. By contrast, baby boomer participation fell to 24.3% from 31.1%.

The report notes that younger clients are now more likely to use advisers and more likely to expect estate planning services as part of that relationship.

Among clients with advisers, 39.7% say they are “very likely” to consider switching to an advisor offering estate planning, and 28% are “somewhat likely.” That puts total switching intent at 67.7%, or more than two-thirds of advised respondents.

The risk is most pronounced among younger clients as 80% of both Gen Z and millennial clients with advisers say they would consider switching, compared with 25.9% of boomers.

More than half of Americans (54%) say their financial anxiety has increased over the past year, and roughly half (49.7%) say economic conditions have made them more motivated to complete estate planning.

Rising costs of living (49.9%) and inflation (38.7%) are the most commonly cited concerns, followed by health care costs, retirement insecurity and job instability.

Nearly half of respondents (47.8%) also say they feel unprepared for the “Great Wealth Transfer,” with an estimated $84 trillion to $124 trillion expected to move between generations over the coming decades.

The survey finds Americans increasingly view financial advisers, not just attorneys, as key estate planning providers. About 27% say they would prefer to create or update an estate plan with a financial adviser, compared with 24% who prefer an attorney and 19% who want both involved.

A majority also expect advisers to play an active oversight role. Roughly 68% say advisers should be responsible for flagging outdated or incomplete estate plans, including 44.7% who say it should be done proactively.

Despite rising expectations, 42% of Americans report having no estate planning documents, and 10.4% are unsure whether they have any. A will remains the most common document (27%), followed by trusts (20.6%) and powers of attorney documents.

The survey also finds persistent gaps by gender and generation. Men are more likely than women to have advisers and estate planning documents, while Gen X reports the highest rate of having no documents at all.

Technology in estate planning

The report also highlights growing openness to technology. About 40.7% of Americans say they would be comfortable using an artificial intelligence tool to help create or update estate planning documents, although most prefer some level of human oversight.

Younger respondents are far more receptive: 57.1% of Gen Z and 52.3% of millennials express comfort with AI-assisted planning, compared with 16.8% of baby boomers.

If a financial adviser proactively offered estate planning help, 63.9% of Americans say they would likely accept.

Advisors are also having an impact when they raise the topic. More than half (56%) of advised clients say these conversations increased their sense of urgency around creating or updating a plan.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision preserving birthright citizenship is unlikely to produce an immediate surge in home sales, but it could bolster something the housing market has lacked — confidence.

For many affected households weighing whether to buy a first home, the ruling removes at least one layer of uncertainty surrounding their long-term future in the U.S.

That reassurance may not outweigh stubborn affordability challenges, but it could encourage some families to move forward with major financial decisions they had delayed, Cotality Chief Economist Selma Hepp told HousingWire.

“The impact is meaningful for confidence for immigrant communities, because it’s not just about citizenship rights, it’s about the financial future and the ability to hold a job in the U.S.,” she said. “[It affects time] spent in deciding where a kid goes to school and all those sort of decisions that feed into households.

“I think maybe the biggest thing is improvement in consumer confidence, rather than some meaningful impact on the economy immediately.”

Research from the American Immigration Council found immigrant households are a major driver of housing demand and neighborhood stability — making confidence and long-term certainty critical to homeownership decisions.

First-time buyers, multi-generation households

While existing homeowners often have more flexibility, Hepp said uncertainty weighs especially heavily on prospective first-time buyers deciding whether to make the largest purchase of their lives.

“It’s still a lot about affordability,” she said. “Maybe you’re talking about Hispanic buyers. Depending on what the income status is, there tends to be multiple co-signers. So, when there’s certainty for each individual within that household, that weighs on their decision, as well. It’s particularly complicated.”

According to the International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, Hispanic households are most likely to co-reside with multiple generations — followed by Asian and African American households.

Hispanic households added a net gain of 441,000 owner-households in 2025 — the largest single-year increase since the U.S. Census Bureau began collecting the data in 1975.

Without Hispanic buyers, the total number of U.S. homeowners would have declined by 125,000 households last year, data from the National Association for Hispanic Real Estate Professionals shows.

Gateway, tech markets may feel greatest effects

Hepp said large gateway cities with sizable immigrant populations could experience the most noticeable effects of the Supreme Court ruling — along with technology-driven metropolitan areas that attract international workers.

“That’s New York, Miami, L.A.,” she said. “You have groups that buy in high-tech markets that are tied to AI and biotech. These are high-income communities like the Bay Area and Seattle or even San Diego and Austin.”

Hepp also noted slowing demand experienced by builders in parts of Texas, but said separating immigration-related uncertainty from broader housing headwinds remains difficult.

“It’s hard to exactly parse out, but I think it’s a significant contributor in markets in which there tends to be higher [immigrant] populations,” she said.

Advice for agents, long-term stability

Hepp cited that the Supreme Court ruling does not alter existing fair housing obligations for real estate professionals.

She advised agents to focus on ensuring clients have access to reliable information while avoiding steering or disparate treatment.

“I think you know the fair housing rules haven’t changed,” she said. “Nothing changes with you being on top of the information that relates specifically to them. Ensure that they have access to the right information through their networks — somebody who they trust.”

Psychological stability reaches beyond housing

Although housing affordability continues to dominate market conditions, Hepp believes broader societal impact of preserving birthright citizenship extends well beyond home sales.

She explained how stability in legal status influences labor markets, household formation, demographic trends and future economic growth — all of which ultimately shape housing demand.

“The repercussions down the road are huge,” Hepp said. “The psychological or emotional immediate impact is really important right now. [The Supreme Court ruling provides] some level of confidence that decisions you made over 30 or 40 years are not going to be changed in a second.”

While mortgage rates, affordability and inventory will continue to determine much of the housing market’s direction, buyer confidence and stability remains an essential ingredient for homeownership.

For many prospective buyers, the Supreme Court’s ruling may not make homes more affordable, but it may provide the certainty needed to begin planning for one.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

In commemoration of the team’s first NBA championship in over 50 years, New York City has temporarily co-named streets in Manhattan for every player on the 2026 New York Knicks. Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the city’s Department of Transportation (DOT) on Monday unveiled 18 new blue-and-orange signs installed at locations across Sixth and Seventh Avenues. The signs feature a player’s name and jersey number, which corresponds to the street where it’s installed, creating a “championship route through the heart of Manhattan,” according to the city.

“This championship belongs to every fan who packed our parks and plazas and every neighbor who high-fived a stranger after another impossible comeback,” Mamdani said.

“These street signs are a tribute to the players who delivered the championship generations of fans waited their whole lives to see and the city that stood behind them every step of the way. Long after the confetti is gone, New Yorkers will be able to walk these streets and remember the team that brought our city so much joy. Knicks in five.”

Last year, the city co-named several streets ahead of the team’s 2025 playoff run, which some fans felt jinxed the Knicks, who soon after lost to the Pacers in the Conference Finals. This time, the city waited until after the team’s first-ever ticker-tape parade ended.

“This New York Knicks team brought so much life to our streets during their magical playoff run, so it’s only right we return the favor,” DOT Commissioner Mike Flynn said.

“With each postseason win, more and more New Yorkers came together in the streets, on sidewalks and in plazas to watch the Knicks play and celebrate their improbable comebacks. New Yorkers will never forget this historic championship run or the players that brought them together for the most joyful 10 weeks we’ve ever experienced.”

Each street sign will remain up for four weeks. Find the Knicks-co-named streets at the locations below:

  • Jordan Clarkson #00: Sixth Avenue and West Houston Street 
  • Dillon Jones #1: Sixth Avenue and Bleeker Street 
  • Miles “Deuce” McBride #2: Sixth Avenue and Minetta Lane 
  • Josh Hart #3: Sixth Avenue and West 3rd Street 
  • Pacôme Dadiet #4: Sixth Avenue and West 4th Street
  • Jose Alvarado #5: Sixth Avenue and Washington Place 
  • OG Anunoby #8: Sixth Avenue and West 8th  Street 
  • Kevin McCullar Jr.# 9: Sixth Avenue and West 9th Street 
  • Jalen Brunson #11: Seventh Avenue South and West 11th Street 
  • Tyler Kolek #13: Seventh Avenue and West 13th Street 
  • Jeremy Sochan #20: Seventh Avenue and West 20 th Street 
  • Mitchell Robinson #23: Seventh Avenue and West 23rd  Street 
  • Mikal Bridges #25: Seventh Avenue and West 25th  Street 
  • Karl-Anthony Towns #32: Seventh Avenue and West 32nd Street 
  • Landry Shamet #44: Sixth Avenue and West 44th Street
  • Trey Jemison III #50: Seventh Avenue and West 50th  Street
  • Mohamed Diawara #51: Seventh Avenue and West 51st  Street
  • Ariel Hukporti #55: Seventh Avenue and West 55th  Street 

RELATED:

The post NYC co-names streets after New York Knicks players first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

A landmarked 1893 Harlem townhouse on Strivers’ Row that was once home to Bob Dylan has sold for $2.8 million after nearly a year on the market. The McKim Mead & White-designed residence at 265 West 139th Street was occupied by the legendary folk singer from 1996 to 2000, when he sold it for $560,000. The home hit the market for $3.7 million in 2017, as 6sqft previously reported, and then for $3 million last July. The five-bedroom home blends 132 years of cultural and architectural history on the iconic tree-lined block with modern upgrades suitable for the 21st-century homeowner.

Entry to the four-story townhouse begins with a landscaped street-level forecourt. A wood-paneled vestibule with intricate tilework leads into a 19-foot salon with period moldings, restored hardwood floors, and two staircases.

The salon flows into a large eat-in kitchen with a powder room, with the home’s terrace and private parking, located along Strivers’ Row’s coveted residents-only alley, nearby. The kitchen is well-appointed with premium appliances by Gaggenau, Sub-Zero, and Panasonic, and a nearby dining area with restored hardwood and glass cabinetry offers space for casual meals.

Directly off the kitchen is the rear terrace, which has been outfitted with new decking, integrated lighting, and ample space for outdoor entertaining. A garage—another rarity for Manhattan residences—provides an additional private parking space.

The parlor floor stretches more than 50 linear feet of connected living and dining space, boasting 10-foot ceilings and original details like pocket doors, decorative fireplaces, and a built-in gallery bench. A butler’s pantry with a wet bar links to the dining room, gallery, and kitchen via a back stair.

A Palladian window trio on one side of the dining room brings in northern light, while the south-facing living room windows frame views of the distinctive yellow brick and white limestone Colonial Revival homes designed by Clarence Luce and Bruce Price across the street.

The third floor hosts two oversized “co-primary” bedrooms, which share a renovated bath with custom marble, Waterworks fixtures, radiant heated floors, and a walk-in shower illuminated by a rooftop skylight.

Three more bedrooms are located on the top floor: a full-width room with southern-facing views over 139th Street, and two overlooking the terrace and carport. The top-floor bathroom features a soaking tub and glass-enclosed shower, also adorned with custom marble and Waterworks fixtures.

Below ground, a full-height sealed cellar offers laundry facilities, a workbench, and ample open storage. The home’s mechanical systems are also located on this level.

[Listing details: 265 West 139th Street at CityRealty]

RELATED:

The post Bob Dylan’s historic Harlem townhouse sells for $2.8M first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

HousingWire is proud to recognize the 2026 Women of Influence honorees, celebrating 100 leaders whose expertise, vision and leadership continue to shape the housing industry. Now in its 17th year, the Women of Influence award honors professionals across mortgage, real estate, fintech and housing whose contributions are driving meaningful progress for their organizations, their customers and the broader industry.

This year’s class includes CEOs, founders, presidents, chief officers and senior executives leading some of housing’s most influential organizations. Their work spans lending, servicing, brokerage, technology, homebuilding and trade associations, reflecting the breadth of leadership guiding the industry through a changing market. Whether driving innovation, leading operations, shaping strategy or advancing the customer experience, these women are helping define the future of housing.

Take a look at the full list of honorees below.

Name Job Title Company Name
Alexandra (Alix) Lumpkin Chief Legal Officer The Real Brokerage
Alyssa Antoci Executive Vice President Asset Based Lending
Amy Daniel Senior Vice President, Title and Close, Default ServiceLink
Andria Lightfoot Vice President, Client Success FirstClose
Anjela Salyer Division President Mattamy Homes Tucson
AnneMarie DeCatsye Chief Executive Officer Canopy Realtor Association / Canopy MLS
Annette Cotton Division Chief Data Officer DataTrace by First American
Bernice Lim Head of Product and Design Newrez
Carolyn Gorman Senior Vice President, Mortgage Director Huntington Bank
Carrie Guarrero Executive Vice President Communications Advisor Fairway Home Mortgage
Caryn Grafton Executive Vice President, National Retail Sales Manager Atlantic Coast Mortgage
Charis Moreno Executive Vice President, Growth NextHome, Inc.
Christine Hansen 2026 NAR President-Elect National Association of REALTORS®
Christy Bunce President New American Funding
Cindy Smaney Senior Vice President, Servicing Operations Freedom Mortgage
Corey McCloskey President John R. Wood Christie’s International Real Estate
Courtnie Cho Executive Vice President, Human Resources and Customer Engagement Bright MLS
Crystal Raines President and Acting Chief Operating Officer NewDay USA
Dana Georgiou Chief Revenue Officer Dunmor
DeAnn Golden President and Chief Executive Officer Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices Georgia Properties
Deborah Winslow Senior Vice President, Commercial Servicing and Reverse Servicing Onity Group
Debra Beagle Chief Executive Officer, Managing Broker, Co-Owner The Ashton Real Estate Group of RE/MAX Advantage
Denise Vieira General Counsel Qualia
Diane Macko Vice President, Operations Gershman Mortgage
Elan Chambers Senior Vice President, Government Relations & Business Development Auction.com
Elly Cummings Divisional Executive Vice President New American Funding
Erica Acie Head of Originations Truist
Erin Dee Chief Operating Officer InterLinc Mortgage
Erinn Nobel Co-Founder and President ENRG Realty
Gina Fitzmaurice President, Growth and Development Flat Branch Home Loans
Heather Lovier Chief Operating Officer Rocket
Helena Farrar Senior Director, Lending Partner Relationship Management Figure
Holly Mabery Chief Brokerage Officer eXp Realty
Jackie Young Senior Vice President, Sales and Acquisitions Freedom Mortgage
Jackie Thiel President Premier Sotheby’s International Realty
Janice Delcid Chief Financial Officer and Co-Founder Epique Realty
Jeanette Lee Head of Fulfillment Better Mortgage & NEO Home Loans
Jenna Rozenblat Chief Operating Officer The Real Brokerage
Jennie Verry Vice President, Product Management Reggora
Jessica Fister Executive Vice President, Mortgage Operations Luminate Bank
Kara Karns-Domic Regional Vice President, Greater Los Angeles Coldwell Banker Realty
Kari Rebehn Vice President, Transitions Moder
Kate Shaver Senior Vice President, Consumer Direct Sales Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC
Kelley Frink Chief Operations Officer Veterans United Home Loans
Kim Nelson Chief Executive Officer BankSouth Mortgage
Kristen Sieffert President Finance of America
Kristie Vainikos Stegen Chief Brand and Communications Officer Cotality
Kristin Allen Assistant Vice President, Real Estate Agent Relations United Wholesale Mortgage
Lacey Conway Senior Vice President HomeServices of America
Laura Meditz Head of Product, Home Lending Wells Fargo
Laura Ritter Chief Financial Officer LPT Aperture Holdings
Lauren Bowen-North Senior Vice President, Lead Generation and Conversion LPT Realty
Laurie Krause Head of Sales Engineering Tidalwave
Lesley Deutch Managing Principal John Burns Research and Consulting
Lesli Gooch Chief Executive Officer Manufactured Housing Institute
Linda Thomas Senior Vice President, Retail Sales AnnieMac Home Mortgage
Lisa Stratton Division President, Valuations Consolidated Analytics
Lori Muller President, Fathom Realty Fathom Holdings, Inc.
Lynn Calahan Chief Data Officer Alpha7X
Lyra Waggoner Chief Operations Officer Movement Mortgage
Margette Hepfner President, Housing Bilt
Margy Grant Chief Executive Officer Florida Realtors®
Marina Walsh Vice President, Industry Analysis Mortgage Bankers Association
Marissa Ghesquiere Interim President of Brokerage Sotheby’s International Realty
Meghan Handy Chief Customer Officer Embrace Home Loans
Melissa Langdale Chief Executive Officer Praxis Lending Solutions
Melissa Macerato Chief Revenue and Marketing Officer Longbridge Financial
Michele Harrington Chief Executive Officer FirstTeam®
Natalie Cox Senior Vice President, Brokerage Operations and Agent Experience LPT Realty
Neena Vlamis Chief Executive Officer and Founder A and N Mortgage Services, Inc.
Nina Zokhrabyan Chief Operating Officer Christie’s International Real Estate Southern California
Nykia Wright Chief Executive Officer National Association of REALTORS®
Pam Forrester Senior Vice President, Division Operations First American
Rebecca Zimmerman Team Leader, Co-Owner and Vice President of Florida Operations RE/MAX Advantage Team Zimmerman
Rhiannon Bolen Vice President, New Business Development Optimal Blue
Rhonda Smith Operating Principal Keller Williams Indy Metro Partners
Ronda Conger Vice President CBH Homes
Rosalie Berg President and Chief Executive Officer Strategic Vantage
Sarah Federico Chief Innovation Officer Northpointe Bank
Sarah Gonzalez Chief Innovation Officer Logan Finance
Stacie Herron Chief Operations Officer and Chief Legal Officer Keller Williams
Stephanie Garrett-Stearns Senior Vice President, Communications and Fund Development The Community Builders, Inc.
Stephenie Flood Chief Operating Officer Gold Nation and RE/MAX Gold
Susan Walker Chief Operating Officer CMG Financial
Tammy Fahmi Senior Vice President, Global Servicing and Strategy Sotheby’s International Realty
Tanya Diaz President of Operations Realty of America
Tara Brown Chief Executive Officer Peerage Realty Partners
Tara Gettles Senior Vice President, Franchise Operations The Agency
Tawn Kelley President Taylor Morrison Home Funding
Taylor Potter Chief Operating Officer Ardley Technologies, Inc.
Teresa Reber Chief Originations Officer The Loan Store, Inc.
Tiffany Czajkowski Chief Compliance Officer Supreme Lending
Tracie Hunter Senior Managing Director, Digital Product and Delivery PennyMac
Twyla Hankins Chief Operating Officer American Financial Network, Inc.
Vadivarasi Muthiah Vice President, Engineering Sagent
Valerie Ausband Senior Vice President, National Field Sales and Strategic Accounts Arch MI
Wendi Harrelson Divisional Leader Keller Williams
Wendy Morrell Head of Relationship Retail Home Lending and Home Equity Strategist U.S. Bank
Wendy Forsythe Chief Operating Officer eXp Realty
Zettra Goodman Waters Executive Vice President, Corporate Operations Freedom Mortgage

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Located near New York City landmarks like Gramercy Park and Union Square, this 20-foot-wide home at 305 East 18th Street sits on a picturesque and historic townhouse block. The 3,200-square-foot, four-story home, asking $5,250,000, is currently configured as a live-work setup, with offices on the garden floor. If you don’t need the workspace (or the rental income), convert the property to a single-family home with ease.

Ascend a classic brownstone stoop to the home’s parlor floor, where you’ll find grand high ceilings and dramatic period details like original crown moldings, marble mantels, and an original wood balustrade and banister connecting to the upper floors.

The parlor floor living area includes a living room and a colorful tiled kitchen anchored by a hefty prep island. At the back is a tiled sunroom that opens onto a narrow patio through tall glass doors. Below, a lower patio provides outdoor space for summer entertaining.

The home’s third floor holds a luxurious primary suite. A renovated en-suite bath joins a dressing room large enough to be a second bedroom, and a private office.

On the top floor are three more bedrooms and a full bath. Bathrooms have been renovated in a simple, vintage style

Back down at the garden level, private office space includes three separate rooms, a half bath, and laundry facilities. From here, you can also access the rear patio.

[Listing details: 305 East 18th Street at CityRealty]

[At Leslie Garfield by Matthew Lesser and Tori Landon]

RELATED:

The post For $5.25M, this Gramercy townhouse has a live-work option for a very short commute first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Boston-based home equity investment (HEI) provider Hometap is facing multiple lawsuits from customers claiming that the company has violated the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and is promoting a “predatory and abusive mortgage loan product.”

The latest class-action suit, filed June 23 by plaintiff Marlene Crawford, a Hometap customer and resident of California, accuses the company of violating TILA and engaging in unlawful, deceptive and unfair business practices.

The lawsuits allege Hometap improperly structured its home equity investment contracts as “Option Purchase Agreements” to avoid federal and state mortgage lending laws. The plaintiffs say the agreements are mortgages subject to TILA and accuse the company of marketing them as “not a loan” to circumvent required consumer protections.

Hometap did not immediately respond to HousingWire‘s requests for comment regarding the litigation. But in one of the class actions — filed in April by Seattle plaintiffs Richard and Romy Hoffman — Hometap contends the dispute over whether the contracts are subject to TILA should be decided by an arbitrator.

“TILA does not bar enforcement of the arbitration agreement because the Agreement does not fit within TILA’s scope,” the motion to compel arbitration and stay action reads. The Hoffmans, however, counter that TILA prohibits mandatory arbitration clauses in residential mortgage agreements.

The litigation adds to ongoing scrutiny from the Massachusetts attorney general, who has separately alleged that Hometap’s products are illegal, high-interest mortgages.

National Mortgage News first reported on the four separate pieces of litigation that Hometap is facing in 2026 alone.

Other class actions

Another of the four suits, filed in February by New Jersey homeowners Ryan Billey and Keicha Greenidge, alleges Hometap advanced about $98,000 in exchange for a 10-year agreement tied to 13% of their home’s appraised value without evaluating their income or ability to repay.

Billey and Greenidge allege that they were unaware that settling the agreement within its 10-year term could require them to repay Hometap up to twice the amount they received. Under the contract, repayment is triggered by events including the sale of the home, a default on property taxes or insurance, the homeowner’s death or the expiration of the agreement.

The plaintiffs claim they would owe roughly $177,000 to $199,000 based on their home’s current estimated value of about $800,000, which they allege exceeds New Jersey’s legal interest rate limits.

“Plaintiffs will be forced to pay Hometap roughly a third of the value of their home subject to an ‘annualized rate of return’ cap of between 17.936% and 21.523% annual compound interest,” the suit states.

As requested in their class action, Billey and Greenidge “respectfully ask the Court to issue an injunction ordering defendants to cease using their Option Purchase Agreements.”

In a separate complaint filed in May in Pennsylvania by plaintiffs Roberta and John Ruane, the borrowers say Hometap “acted in bad faith and with intent to defraud,” and that the company “never revealed to Plaintiffs and Class members that an HEI was actually a predatory high-interest loan that was carefully crafted with illusory contract language to avoid regulation.”

The Ruanes also allege that upon entering the HEI contract, they would have owed Hometap 15.845% of their home’s value, or $64,964.50, to exit the agreement. That’s in addition to closing costs, an amount totaling about 67% more than their original investment.

Based on the home’s current estimated value of $571,600, the plaintiffs would owe $90,570.02 to pay off and exit the contract today, plus closing costs. That figure is about 132% higher than the initial investment amount.

At the projected 10-year appreciation rate, the home could be worth $797,000. If Hometap exercised its option at that point, the plaintiffs would owe $126,284.65, excluding closing costs, or roughly 224% more than the original investment.

HEIs under scrutiny

Like Hometap, other home equity investment providers like Unison Agreement Corp. have come under fire over allegedly deceptive practices.

In June, two additional plaintiffs joined a federal class-action lawsuit in Colorado against Unison and affiliates. The original suit, filed in April of this year, alleges Unison misled borrowers by marketing its agreements as debt-free financing.

A separate class-action suit filed earlier this year in California alleges the company uses equity-sharing contracts that function as unlicensed, high-interest mortgages disguised as investment partnerships.

In a related case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year in Olson v. Unison that the company’s product operated as a reverse mortgage under Washington state law and involved deceptive marketing practices, although the matter was later settled.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Work has begun on the redesign of the East Village’s popular Avenue B Open Street, bringing expanded pedestrian space, new cycling connections, and safety upgrades. The city’s Department of Transportation (DOT) on Monday announced the start of construction on the project, which will upgrade the corridor from East 4th Street to East 12th Street. The redesign includes intersection improvements, new loading zones, and one-way traffic reversals aimed at reducing vehicle volumes along Avenue B and improving safety for pedestrians and cyclists.

Rendering showing the design for Avenue B with expanded pedestrian space and safety upgrades. Credit: NYC DOT

The new design converts vehicle traffic to northbound only between East 7th Street and East 10th Street, limiting traffic to necessary local access. Emergency vehicles and city services, such as sanitation trucks, will still be able to access the avenue under the new design.

Every intersection in the project area will receive new pedestrian curb extensions protected by planters, bike corrals, granite blocks, and other elements. The sidewalk expansions are expected to provide a triple benefit: creating more public space for pedestrians, shortening crossing distances, and improving visibility between pedestrians and other road users.

DOT will also install neighborhood loading zones at the start and end of each block to reduce large truck traffic along the corridor. Vans will be permitted to use the corridor for deliveries, loading, and unloading. Pedestrians are encouraged to continue using the Avenue B Open Street during its daily hours of 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.

The project builds upon the successful Open Street, which for years has provided much-needed recreation space and safer connections for pedestrians and cyclists to Tompkins Square Park and nearby schools.

“For years, East Village neighbors have championed, activated, and advocated for a calmer, more people-first Avenue B, and we’re thrilled to see NYC DOT making that vision a reality,” Jackson Chabot, director of advocacy and organization at Open Plans, said.

“Avenue B’s Open Street has been a shining example of what’s possible when we prioritize people over cut-through traffic, and this investment builds on that success,” he added.

DOT expects the project to be completed within the next several weeks, weather permitting.

RELATED:

The post NYC begins work on Avenue B Open Street redesign, adding pedestrian space, bike connections first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on Wednesday released historical credit score data for FICO Score 10T and additional data for VantageScore 4.0, giving lenders a window into how the new models perform compared to the legacy Classic FICO model.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and Fair Isaac Corp. (FICO) agreed to terms for the release of the historical FICO Score 10T data in December. The release of VantageScore 4.0 data was previously announced in July 2024, covering individual mortgage scores from 2013 to 2023.

FHFA Director Bill Pulte announced the adoption of the new credit scoring models in April, noting at the time that the data would be available this summer. Access to historical credit data is a critical step for the mortgage industry’s transition. It allows lenders, investors and risk modelers to validate score performance and ensure regulatory compliance.

The currently available data represents loans acquired by the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) from approximately April 2013 to September 2025, closely aligning with applications and originations from January 2013 to June 2025.

“Trended data is a key component of the new scoring models and, following discussions with the credit bureaus, it was confirmed that they do not have consistent trended data to support the calculation of FICO 10T and VantageScore 4.0 prior to 2013,” the GSEs said in an FAQ published on their websites.

The anonymous data relies on an “Average then Average” loan-level score calculation methodology — meaning the available credit scores from each credit bureau are averaged for each borrower.

For loans with multiple borrowers, a simple average of all borrowers’ credit scores is calculated. If a loan lacked a FICO Score 10T or VantageScore 4.0 credit score from any bureau, it was excluded from the historical file.

But the current tri-merge “Middle/Lower then Lowest” methodology is also available. Under that system, the middle of three (or lower of two) credit bureau scores is selected for each borrower, and the lowest score among all borrowers on the loan is ultimately chosen.

“The Classic FICO calculation methodology will not be changing, and the data is already available through the existing disclosure datasets,” the GSEs said.

VantageScore 4.0 is currently available to a limited number of lenders, while FICO Score 10T will be made available at a later date, according to the enterprises.

This article was written by Flávia Furlan Nunes and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

The Houston-based Antinozzi Group has returned to Compass after a stint at REMAX, according to an announcement on Wednesday.

In 2025, the team closed 35 transaction sides totaling $30.80 million in sales volume, earning the team the No. 190 rank among small teams in Texas for sales volume in the 2026 RealTrends Verified rankings. 

The three-person team, led by Houston-area real estate agent Joe Antinozzi with team member Kristin Weaver specializes in residential sales across Greater Houston, including The Woodlands, Spring and Montgomery.

“We are thrilled to welcome The Antinozzi Group back to Compass,” Seita Jongebloed, the managing director of Compass Greater Houston, said in a statement. “By pairing their local expertise with our end-to-end technology platform, they are primed to elevate the buying and selling experience for their clients across Greater Houston.”

Antinozzi, originally from the Maryland/Virginia area, relocated to Houston with ExxonMobil before shifting into real estate. He spent his first seven years in the business with REMAX.

During a prior stint at Compass, Antinozzi said he was drawn to the company’s technology, marketing and data tools — factors that ultimately prompted the team’s move back.

“We’ve built our business by constantly looking for ways to provide more value to our clients,” Antinozzi said in the release. “Returning to Compass was a strategic decision because no other brokerage offers the combination of technology, marketing, data and collaboration that Compass does.”

This article was written by Brooklee Han and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Today, I am proud to announce a pivotal moment in our association’s history: We are now the Commercial Real Estate Development Association (CREDA). This change goes far beyond a name change; it signifies a clear statement about what our association stands for, who we serve and where we are headed.

More than 50 years ago, a group of professionals focused on the development of office and industrial parks first came together. These individuals saw a need for an organization that could connect people working in this industry as well as advance the interests of commercial real estate on the state, local and federal levels.

Over time, our association has grown to include 22,000 commercial real estate professionals in 55 chapters across the U.S. and Canada. We have produced countless research reports through our Research Foundation; grown our flagship Forums program to more than 1,100 members; launched new courses and resources to advance our members’ careers; and brought together the members of our extensive network to build relationships and partnerships. And, of course, true to our origins, we have achieved numerous legislative successes at all levels of government.a

Commercial real estate has changed over the history of our association and it is time for our name to reflect that. The industry encompasses multifamily, retail, aerospace, industrial outdoor storage, senior living, data centers, medical office, life sciences, student housing and more. It connects developers, owners, investors, building managers, engineers, architects, brokers and others. Commercial real estate has adopted new technologies and adapted to changing ways of working and living.

The Commercial Real Estate Development Association is direct, precise and clear. It affirms that our association is the place for commercial real estate professionals to develop their skills, build their careers, shape the industry and make a difference in their communities. It conveys to policymakers and partners that our association represents our members and the industry. It creates a bridge between the public’s perception of commercial real estate and the work that our members do in the communities in which they also live, work, shop, innovate and connect.

From creating jobs to delivering tax revenue, commercial real estate plays a significant role in the economic growth of cities and towns across North America. But above all, our industry is one focused on people. The relationships that go into a development team require strong partnerships and commitment. As bright, bold and high achieving as our members are, they cannot accomplish a development project without a team. This mirrors the foundation of our association; our focus is, as it always has been, on people.

As we go forward under this new name, our unwavering commitment to our members has not changed. Members will continue to benefit from exceptional education, effective advocacy, extensive networking and cutting-edge research. Our association will continue to provide our members with innovative resources to stay at the forefront of change. Now, they can move forward with confidence that this new name will bring clarity as we tell the story of commercial real estate development and the critical role it plays in communities across North America.

I would like to thank the members of our executive committee and board of directors, the members of our rebrand task force, our CREDA Global and chapter staff, our graphic design and media partners working on this rebrand, and above all, our members. You are the reason that our association exists, and it’s with you that our association thrives.

Together, we will build on the established strength of our former name and look to the future with our new one. Together, we will advance our members and the commercial real estate industry. Together, we will build what is next for commercial real estate.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

As New York City enters a dangerous heat wave, officials are rolling out a series of measures to help New Yorkers stay cool. Temperatures over 100 degrees are expected to hit the five boroughs starting Thursday, prompting Mayor Zohran Mamdani to activate the city’s emergency heat plan. The mayor announced additional measures, including opening more cooling centers, extending pool hours, intensifying outreach, and encouraging New Yorkers to check on their neighbors.

The measures implemented on Monday include deploying 21 Cooling Outreach On-Location (COOL) vans. Operated by NYC Health + Hospitals and staffed by medical providers, the vans offer resources such as electrolytes, sunscreen, meals, and transportation to cooling centers or healthcare facilities. Staff will also perform in-home wellness checks on older adults.

Additional cooling centers have also opened, with real-time cooling center wayfinding available through more than 2,200 LinkNYC kiosks.

Pop-up cooling stations for outdoor workers and large-scale outreach to more than 75,000 businesses are intended to help keep workers safe during the heat. The stations will offer water, misting fans, and cooling towels to street vendors, delivery workers, and day laborers.

The city’s public pools opened on June 27. Credit: Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office on Flickr

Hours will be extended at Olympic- and intermediate-sized outdoor swimming pools until 8:30 p.m., a half hour longer than during previous heat waves and one and a half hours longer than normal operating hours. The city’s roughly 50 outdoor pools are free and open daily at 11 a.m.

Local firehouses will distribute free spray caps to adults 18 and older to turn fire hydrants into sprinklers.

Eight additional city buildings will operate as cooling centers from noon to midnight from July 3 through July 5. The locations are the David N. Dinkins Municipal Building, 22 Reade Street, 100 Gold Senior Center, Brooklyn Borough Hall, NYCEM Headquarters, the Bergen Building, Queens Borough Hall, and Staten Island Borough Hall.

Ten additional public library branches will also serve as cooling centers during the holiday weekend: Brooklyn Public Library’s Central, Brighton Beach, Saratoga, and Sunset Park branches; the New York Public Library’s Grand Concourse, Countee Cullen, and Port Richmond branches; and the Queens Public Library’s Central, Jackson Heights, and Far Rockaway branches.

Find a cooling center near you here. Use NYC Parks’ map here to find sprinklers, outdoor pools, drinking fountains, and tree cover for the city’s shadiest spots.

Officials are also asking businesses to set thermostats to 78 degrees and encouraging all New Yorkers to conserve energy during periods of peak demand.

The city is adding 150 volunteers to its outreach workforce, bringing the total to more than 600 people. Street canvassing and outreach will intensify under a Code Red from 12 p.m. to 8 p.m. on all heat advisory days to connect unhoused New Yorkers with shelter, cooling centers, and essential resources.

Residents are encouraged to check on their neighbors, especially older adults, people with disabilities, and those with chronic illnesses. New Yorkers should call 911 immediately if they or someone they know exhibits signs of heat illness, such as hot, dry skin, trouble breathing, rapid heartbeat, confusion, disorientation, dizziness, nausea, or vomiting.

Anyone who sees an unhoused individual who may need assistance is also encouraged to call 311.

“I am asking every New Yorker to make a heat plan before the worst of this weather arrives,” Mamdani said. “The best protection against extreme heat is air conditioning. If you don’t have it at home, know now where you’ll go to stay cool.”

“Check in on your neighbors, especially seniors, and if you see someone outside who appears to be in distress, call 311 so we can get help to them,” he added. “This administration is using every tool we have to keep New Yorkers safe, but the strongest city is one where neighbors look out for one another.”

New Yorkers can stay up to date on the latest heat advisories by signing up for Notify NYC, the city’s free emergency communications program, texting NOTIFYNYC to 692-692, or visiting the city’s website for additional health and safety guidance.

RELATED:

The post NYC expands heat wave protections for 4th of July weekend first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Brooklyn’s most notorious unfinished megaproject may finally be getting a last chapter. On Monday, June 29, Empire State Development, the state’s economic-development agency, along with developers Cirrus Workforce Housing and LCOR, unveiled a $5 billion plan to complete the long-stalled Atlantic Yards project, now known as Pacific Park, more than two decades after it was first announced. Governor Kathy Hochul called it one of New York’s most significant unfinished affordable-housing developments and said the state is finally moving it toward completion.

The plan calls for six new high-rise towers holding about 5,600 apartments and condos, including roughly 1,242 units, or about 21%, set aside as affordable for low- and moderate-income households. It would add about five and a half acres of public open space and feature a nearly 800-foot skyscraper connected to a 570-foot tower at the corner of Flatbush Avenue and Pacific Street, in the Prospect Heights neighborhood next to the Barclays Center.

To understand why this matters, it helps to know why the project stalled for so long. Atlantic Yards was first announced in 2003 by developer Forest City Ratner, with star architect Frank Gehry and Brooklyn’s own Jay-Z attached, and the Barclays Center opened in 2012. But the housing kept getting delayed. The project later passed to Greenland USA, which defaulted on roughly $350 million in loans. Cirrus and LCOR acquired the development rights at a foreclosure auction last October, becoming the third development team to take on the project.

The hardest and most expensive part is literally building on air. Six of the planned towers must sit on platforms constructed above the MTA’s Vanderbilt Rail Yard, where Long Island Rail Road trains continue to operate. Building those decks is a complex engineering challenge that adds an estimated $700 million to the cost and has been one of the biggest reasons the project has dragged on for more than two decades. New York State has now pledged about $700 million toward the platforms, including $175 million already approved in the latest state budget.

Here is where the business story becomes especially important for Brooklyn’s economy. Much of the construction will be financed by union pension funds, which will provide financing to the developers rather than relying primarily on traditional bank loans. Cirrus has committed to using union labor, creating the potential for years of well-paying construction jobs throughout the borough. Cirrus Chief Executive Joseph McDonnell said construction could begin by 2028, with the first affordable apartments welcoming residents as early as 2031 and full completion expected by the late 2030s.

For Brooklyn renters, the affordable housing is the centerpiece of the proposal. Housing costs throughout the borough have surged, with Prospect Heights home prices topping $1 million years ago. Adding more than 1,200 income-restricted apartments could provide meaningful relief. Critics, however, argue that too many of those units are aimed at moderate-income households instead of the lowest-income families originally promised when the state used eminent domain to assemble the site. Assemblymember Jo Anne Simon and local housing advocates say the revised plan still falls short of earlier affordability commitments.

The economic benefits extend well beyond housing. The development also includes retail and office space, along with community facilities such as an intergenerational center in the first residential building. Thousands of new residents would bring additional customers to local restaurants, retailers, and neighborhood businesses along Atlantic and Flatbush avenues, helping support an area that has lived alongside construction for years. New public open space is also intended to better connect the development with the surrounding community.

The project still has significant hurdles before construction begins. It must complete an environmental review expected to take about two years before receiving final approval from the Empire State Development board, a vote that may not occur until 2028. A memorandum of understanding between the developers and the state is due by July 31, 2026. If an agreement is not reached, the state could pursue penalties tied to previously unbuilt affordable housing commitments.

Still, the announcement represents the most meaningful progress in years on a project that became synonymous with delays. If completed, Pacific Park would deliver thousands of new homes, years of union construction jobs, expanded retail and office space, and new public parks. After more than two decades of missed deadlines, Brooklyn will now be watching to see whether Cirrus and LCOR can finally deliver what previous developers could not.

JBizNews Desk
© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or distribution without written permission is prohibited.

On:

Mortgage applications increased 0.04% from one week earlier, according to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) weekly mortgage applications survey for the week ending June 26, 2026.

Last week’s results included an adjustment for the Juneteenth holiday. On an unadjusted basis, the index increased 11% compared with the previous week.

The refinance index decreased 1% from the previous week and was 9% higher than the same week one year ago. The refinance share of mortgage activity decreased to 41.4% of total applications from 41.5% the previous week.

The seasonally adjusted purchase index increased 1% from one week earlier, while the unadjusted Purchase Index increased 11% compared with the previous week and was 3% higher than the same week one year ago.

“Mortgage rates eased slightly last week as oil prices declined. As a result, mortgage applications increased modestly, with an uptick in purchase activity offsetting a smaller decline in refinances,” said Joel Kan, MBA’s vice president and deputy chief economist. “Purchase applications remain ahead of 2025’s pace and have exhibited year-over-year growth for almost three months, as prospective homebuyers are finding opportunities in markets with ample inventory and easing home-price growth. ARM loans accounted for less than 8% of applications, the lowest share since January, as the yield curve continues to flatten with relatively higher short-term rates.”

The adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) share of activity decreased to 7.6% of total applications. By product, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) share of total applications decreased to 16.9% from 17.9% the week prior. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) share of total applications increased to 12.9% from 12.3% the week prior. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) share of total applications decreased to 0.4% from 0.5% the week prior.

The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages with conforming loan balances ($832,750 or less) decreased to 6.57% from 6.59% while rates for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages with jumbo loan balances (greater than $832,750) remained unchanged at 6.52%.

The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages backed by the FHA increased to 6.27% from 6.25%, and the average rate for 15-year fixed-rate mortgages decreased to 6% from 6.02%. The average contract interest rate for 5/1 ARMs increased to 5.79% from 5.68 %.

Xactus Mortgage Intent Index

Xactus’s Mortgage Intent Index — which analyzes aggregated, anonymized credit-pull activity across the Xactus Intelligent Verification Platform — increased 3.53% week over week to a reading of 123.3

“The Xactus Mortgage Intent Index rebounded approximately 3.5% from the prior week, recovering from muted volumes associated with the Juneteenth holiday. The latest reading was also approximately 10.4% higher than the Memorial Day week recorded a month earlier, reflecting a normalization in borrower activity following two consecutive holiday-impacted periods,” said Thomas Lloyd, Xactus’ chief strategy officer.

chart visualization

Lloyd continued, “On a year-over-year basis, the index was approximately 5.6% lower than the same week in 2025. However, because the Xactus Mortgage Intent Index is not seasonally adjusted, differences in holiday timing and borrower activity can temporarily influence weekly volumes.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Congress is finally treating housing affordability as a production problem rather than simply another demand problem. Much of the attention surrounding the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act has focused on its restriction against additional single-family home purchases by large institutional investors.

That provision makes for a compelling political headline: Homes should be owned by families, not corporations.

But it is not the most important part of the bill.

The legislation’s bigger breakthrough is that Congress is finally acknowledging the root of America’s housing affordability problem: We do not have enough homes where people need them, in the types and price ranges they can afford.

Congress passed the package with overwhelming bipartisan support. At the time of writing, however, it has not been signed into law after President Trump canceled a scheduled June 24 signing. Whatever happens next politically, the policy direction deserves the housing industry’s attention.

For too long, Washington has approached affordability primarily as a demand-side problem.

Give buyers a larger tax credit. Create another down payment assistance program. Expand subsidized financing. Find a way to help consumers borrow more money.

Those policies may help selected buyers, but they do not create additional housing.

When more purchasing power is introduced into a market with chronically limited inventory, buyers are simply given more money with which to compete against one another. That can increase demand without addressing the underlying shortage.

The ROAD to Housing Act begins with a better premise: Affordability cannot be meaningfully improved without increasing supply.

The unglamorous reforms may matter most

The bill includes dozens of housing and banking provisions, but several of its least sensational ideas may ultimately produce the greatest results.

It directs HUD to develop best-practice frameworks for zoning and land-use policies. It supports faster environmental reviews for smaller and infill projects. It encourages communities to create preapproved housing designs. It establishes a pathway for converting vacant and abandoned buildings into attainable housing.

None of these ideas will generate the attention attracted by restrictions on institutional acquisitions. Yet these are precisely the changes that could reduce the time, uncertainty and expense involved in creating homes.

Consider preapproved housing plans.

A local government could approve a catalog of designs for accessory dwelling units, duplexes, townhomes, cottage courts and other smaller-scale housing. A builder using one of those plans would not need to begin every architectural and regulatory review from scratch.

That can be particularly valuable to smaller local builders.

Large developers can absorb years of entitlement work, legal expenses and redesigns. Smaller builders often cannot. Reducing those preliminary costs could allow more local companies to build on individual lots and pursue infill projects that are too small for national builders.

It is not a dramatic reform. It is a practical one.

The same is true of requiring certain communities receiving federal funding to maintain searchable databases of undeveloped publicly owned land. Housing cannot be built on land that builders do not know is available.

Factory-built housing needs a fairer opportunity

The legislation also attempts to expand the role of manufactured and modular housing.

It updates the federal definition of manufactured housing, directs FHA to examine barriers to modular-construction financing and modernizes financing standards for factory-built homes.

The housing industry should pay close attention to this section.

Factory-built housing is still burdened by outdated consumer perceptions and inconsistent local treatment. Yet modern manufacturing could help the industry reduce weather delays, control material waste and address parts of the skilled-labor shortage.

This does not mean factory-built housing will replace traditional construction. It means the industry may gain another tool for producing attainable homes in markets where conventional building costs have made entry-level construction nearly impossible.

Expanding housing supply will require more than one type of builder and more than one method of construction.

Small mortgages are an overlooked affordability issue

The bill also recognizes a problem that real estate agents and lenders in lower-priced markets have understood for years: A home can be affordable to the buyer but uneconomical for the lender to finance.

A $75,000 or $100,000 mortgage may require nearly as much processing, compliance and staff time as a significantly larger loan. The lender, however, earns less revenue from the transaction.

The result is a market failure. Lower-priced properties exist, qualified buyers want them, but suitable financing is difficult to obtain.

The legislation authorizes an FHA pilot for mortgages of $100,000 or less and directs regulators to examine compensation, points and fee rules that may discourage smaller loans.

This will not transform lending overnight. Regulators must develop the details, and lenders must decide whether the resulting economics make sense.

Still, acknowledging the problem is meaningful. Affordability is not only about the price of a home. It is also about whether financing is actually available for homes at the lower end of the market.

Do not overstate the institutional-investor provision

Restricting large institutional investors may modestly reduce competition for certain single-family homes in markets where those buyers have been especially active.

It may also be politically popular. But it should not be mistaken for a complete housing-supply strategy.

Preventing one buyer from purchasing an existing home does not create another home. Nor does it automatically make that property affordable to a first-time buyer facing high interest rates, insurance costs, property taxes and repair expenses.

The investor provision may change who is able to bid on some existing inventory. The supply provisions could change how much inventory exists.

That distinction matters.

Passage would only be the beginning

If the bill becomes law, no one should expect a sudden national decline in home prices.

Many of its provisions depend on federal rulemaking, agency execution, local participation and future funding decisions. Local governments will still control most zoning and development approvals. Construction will still face labor, material, infrastructure and insurance costs.

The results, where they occur, will be gradual and uneven.

Some communities will embrace preapproved designs, infill development and factory-built housing. Others will accept federal assistance while resisting the local changes needed to produce meaningful inventory.

That makes implementation the next major test.

Federal agencies should measure success by homes produced, approval times reduced and financing obstacles removed—not by reports written, programs announced or grants distributed.

State and local leaders should be expected to show that regulatory changes result in actual permits and construction.

The real estate and mortgage industries should participate constructively while resisting the temptation to protect outdated processes simply because they are familiar.

The ROAD to Housing Act is not a complete answer to America’s housing crisis.

It is, however, an important change in diagnosis.

Housing affordability is ultimately a supply problem. Until America can build more homes, more quickly, in more forms and at more attainable price points, every other affordability policy will remain incomplete.

Congress appears to have finally understood that.

Now the industry must make sure implementation does not lose sight of it.

Tim and Julie Harris are co-founders of Tim & Julie Harris Real Estate Coaching, bestselling authors and hosts of Real Estate Coaching Radio. For daily news, analysis and strategies for real estate professionals, visit Harris Real Estate Daily.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Loan analysis and technology firm Reverse Market Insight (RMI) on Wednesday announced an expansion of its Reverse Qualifier tool, giving reverse mortgage originators the opportunity to price and model the benefits of proprietary products from SmartFi Home Loans alongside existing capabilities for Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs).

RMI initially launched Reverse Qualifier in October 2025, offering demonstrations to attendees at the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association (NRMLA) Annual Meeting. At that time, the tool only covered traditional HECM loans, HECM-to-HECM refinances and HECM for Purchase transactions.

Roughly nine months later, the product has become more inclusive. RMI President John Lunde and director of client relations Jon McCue spoke with HousingWire‘s Reverse Mortgage Daily (RMD) about the benefits of the platform, noting that plans to include more private-label offerings from other leading reverse mortgage lenders are in the works.

RMI spent more than a year building the Reverse Qualifier tool, which uses some of the same technology that powers its HECM Loan Comparison and Underwriting Tool (HLCUT). While Reverse Qualifier largely targets loan officers in the forward mortgage space who are less familiar with reverse mortgages, it has also proven valuable to experienced reverse LOs as they model loan options for clients and seek clarity on compensation.

C2 Financial Corp., a top-five broker in the HECM space, has been using RMI’s tool across a swath of its roughly 1,000 originators.

According to Shain Urwin, C2’s national reverse mortgage director, it functions similarly to Optimal Blue‘s Loansifter as brokers can compare compensation levels and identify the best deal for borrowers across multiple lenders — including Finance of America, Mutual of Omaha Mortgage and Traditional Mortgage Acceptance Corp.

“No. 1 is the simplicity and flow — it makes it so easy, it’s very simple, it flows well. Two is, I like how you can illustrate and drop off different things — like the fees and the insurance — through different parts of this little pie chart they built that allows you to tell the story and add the layers of the story as you need to,” Urwin said.

“Really, the biggest takeaway for us was the fact that you could see your revenue. You can see as an LO, do I have a deal, am I going to be compensated on this deal and what is that compensation?”

Earlier this year, REVERSE plus launched a similar integration for its ANALYZER PRO platform, allowing originators to model HECM options and Smartfi proprietary products in a single system.

Intuitive interface

Reverse Qualifier is able to compare loan options side by side for easier explanations to clients, and LOs can filter options to show only the products that best match an individual borrower’s scenario.

The dashboard-style tool includes the ability to drag and drop products to compare features. Users can see which loan option has the highest maximum proceeds over a specific term and can automatically flag key benefits such as the lowest closing cost.

By entering some basic borrower information — including the property address, estimated home value and any required debt payoffs — the technology can determine whether a homeowner qualifies for a given product. It shows the value of a reverse mortgage by modeling how a line of credit can grow over time based on home price projections and potential voluntary borrower payments.

Along with loan officers, the tool is designed for use by closed loan sellers and issuers of HECM Mortgage-Backed Securities (HMBS).

“We’re trying to keep it super simple and boil it back to the real-world implications of what this loan does for you versus this (other) loan,” Lunde said. “How much equity do I have at the end of 10 years and how much cash can I get access to? And it’s dramatically different in some of these situations between the different loan products.”

Proprietary channel growth

Reverse Qualifier is one of the tools that aims to complement reverse-specific loan origination systems like QuantumReverse. It arrives at a time when private-label reverse mortgages are in growth mode and account for a larger market share by dollar volume than federally insured HECMs.

Smartfi has leaned into proprietary offerings through its Choice loan. While endorsement data for individual companies in the proprietary channel is not publicly available, Smartfi was the nation’s 15th-largest lender by HECM count through the first five months of the year with 120 endorsements, according to RMI.

“We are thrilled to expand the reach of Choice, our industry-leading proprietary reverse mortgage loan program, through the launch of Reverse Qualifier. Smartfi believes reverse mortgages should be a part of all retirement planning conversations, and new technology solutions such as this make that possible,” Kim Smith, Smartfi’s senior vice president of wholesale lending, told RMD in a statement.

Urwin said the tool has made a difference for C2’s forward loan officers who rarely do reverse mortgages. The company created a “Does My Client Qualify?” button on its internal site, which routes LOs into Reverse Qualifier. Additionally, Urwin said he uses it to present to every client as he seeks to break down closing costs, Federal Housing Administration mortgage insurance and line-of-credit details in digestible fashion.

The platform also has a “short to close” feature that lets all parties know when a borrower doesn’t qualify for a given scenario, highlighting the exact shortfall in red letters. LOs have the ability to adjust their margin downward to find a workable scenario.

“In the broker world, we have to disclose what we make on a loan,” Urwin said, adding that he estimates the company’s typical margin at roughly 1.8% versus an industry average of 2.25% to 2.5%. “The lenders don’t, so being a principal agent or closed loan seller, you could be making 10 grand more than I’m making on the loan — which many of them are, because they charge higher margins.”

McCue said he feels vindicated having top originators in the reverse space adopt the tool and find value in it.

“Prior to Shain signing on with us for this, he had a 45-minute pricing video people had to watch on how to price a loan,” McCue said. “It took us about two years to really get to this — the actual loan revenue piece.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

For years, the amenity playbook in multifamily was simple: build it, bundle it, absorb the cost and call it a competitive differentiator. Rooftop decks, co-working lounges and resort-style pools have all been baked into the rent, and all have been treated as overhead. The logic made sense when lease-ups were the priority and operators could pass the cost on to base rents without residents noticing. 

That era is ending. 

A convergence of forces in the form of municipal fee restriction laws, growing resident backlash against nickel-and-dime charges and tightening net operating income (NOI) margins in a high-rate environment is pushing operators to fundamentally rethink the amenity model. 

The question is no longer “what amenities do residents want?” It’s “which amenities can generate revenue on their own terms?” 

The fee law reckoning 

Over the past two years, a wave of state and local legislation has targeted junk fees in housing. From California’s fee transparency requirements to proposed federal rules on mandatory disclosures, the regulatory environment is making it harder to layer ancillary charges onto leases without scrutiny. Operators who built their revenue models around application fees, administrative fees and convenience charges are finding that well running dry. 

The instinct to replace that revenue with new line-item fees like pet rent tiers, package locker fees and parking premiums is running into a second problem: Residents are paying attention now in a way they weren’t before. Renter advocacy has grown alongside rent growth, and the tolerance for fees that feel punitive rather than value-added has dropped considerably. 

The operators catching on earliest aren’t fighting the trend. They’re pivoting around it. 

Pay-to-play as a business model, not a perk 

The model gaining traction looks less like an apartment community and more like a hotel. Not only in aesthetics, but in economics.

Hotels have long understood that amenities exist on a spectrum: some are table stakes included in the room rate (Wi-Fi, the gym), and some are revenue-generating experiences that guests opt into (the spa, the rooftop bar, the mini-bar). The key distinction is that the latter are priced, positioned and operated as actual businesses within the property. 

Forward-thinking multifamily operators are applying the same logic. Instead of a pool that costs $80,000 a year to maintain and gets bundled into rent, consider a pool with private cabana rentals, guest passes and weekend programming that generates bookable revenue. 

Instead of a fitness center that sits half-empty, a studio with paid fitness classes, personal training slots and on-demand wellness content. Instead of a co-working lounge that nobody manages, curated private office hours and dedicated desk memberships. All are available to residents and, in some cases, the surrounding community. 

The shift isn’t about charging residents more for what they already have. It’s about creating genuine value at a price point people will choose to pay. 

The NOI case 

The math is compelling. A well-run amenity profit center doesn’t just offset its own operating costs; it adds meaningful NOI without requiring new units or rent increases. In a market where organic rent growth has moderated, and expense inflation remains stubborn, that’s not a nice-to-have, it’s a strategic priority. 

Food is perhaps the clearest example of the model working as intended. A building that partners with a quality meal service, one that residents actively choose over delivery apps, isn’t just generating ancillary revenue. It’s instead solving a real daily problem and building retention through daily habits. That’s the difference between an amenity that gets used once and photographed for marketing, and one that touches residents three times a week. 

More importantly, this model aligns incentives in a way that fee-stacking never did. When an amenity has to earn its keep through voluntary adoption, operators are forced to make it genuinely good. That quality feedback loop produces resident experiences worth talking about, and in a market where review culture drives lease decisions, that matters. 

What it requires 

Executing this well isn’t just a programming decision. It requires operators to think differently about staffing, technology and the physical design of amenity spaces. Booking infrastructure, capacity management and dynamic pricing (capabilities borrowed wholesale from hospitality) become operational necessities. 

It also requires a change in how deals are underwritten. Treating amenity revenue as a real line item in pro formas, rather than a rounding error or an afterthought, is a discipline that acquisition teams and asset managers will need to build. 

The communities doing this well aren’t the largest portfolios, not yet. They tend to be mid-size regional operators with the flexibility to experiment and the proximity to their residents to understand what experiences people will actually pay for. But the institutional players are watching, and the pilots underway today will inform the standard operating model for the next development cycle. 

The bottom line 

The amenity arms race rewarded whoever could build the most impressive list. The emerging model rewards whoever can build the best experience and charge for it honestly. 

For multifamily operators navigating fee law headwinds and margin compression simultaneously, that’s not just a trend worth tracking, but a business model worth building. 

Evyn Blackwell is a strategic GTM and revenue leader who currently leads strategic partnerships at CookUnity.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.  

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

A major shift has happened inside American housing finance, and it should have the full attention of lenders, regulators and policymakers. For the first time on record, Americans 70 and older hold a larger share of the nation’s real estate wealth than Americans aged 40 to 54. That crossover happened in 2025. Older homeowners now control roughly 26% of America’s $48 trillion in real estate wealth. Homeowners 62 and older hold $14.66 trillion in home equity, an all-time high.

These are not abstract numbers. They represent roofs, lots, neighborhoods, tax bills, repairs, insurance payments and decades of financial discipline. Yet when many of these same homeowners try to access a responsible portion of that wealth, the mortgage system often treats them as difficult borrowers. Not because they lack equity. Not because they lack credit. Because their income no longer looks like a paycheck.

That is the contradiction at the center of retirement housing finance. 

Measuring wealth in an income-obsessed system 

America has built a system that recognizes monthly income more easily than accumulated wealth. For decades, underwriting has been organized around employment, debt-to-income ratios (DTI) and the assumption that monthly earnings are the clearest measure of repayment ability. That framework works reasonably well for a salaried worker. 

It works less cleanly for a retired homeowner whose strength may lie in home equity, retirement accounts, Social Security, pension income, investment assets, reserves and a long record of payment performance.

In other words, the borrower may be strong. The system just may not be built to see that strength clearly.

A fragmented product menu 

The product menu reflects the blind spot. In a low-rate world, the answer was often a cash-out refinance. Today, that answer can look more like a penalty. A homeowner with a 3% first mortgage should not have to refinance the entire loan into a 6%-plus rate to access a limited amount of liquidity.

HELOCs and home equity loans help some borrowers, but they still run through income and DTI frameworks that may misread retirement cash flow. Reverse mortgages are appropriate for some homeowners, and the HECM program remains important. But reverse mortgages are not the whole answer. Many seniors do not understand them, do not trust them or do not fit the product cleanly.

The rate environment has turned senior equity access from a niche product conversation into a mainstream housing-finance problem. The market already sees the gap. Private capital has begun building second-lien reverse products that allow older homeowners to access equity without disturbing a low first-mortgage rate. Asset-depletion underwriting already exists in agency guidelines, converting verified assets into qualifying income.

So the issue is not that no tools exist. The issue is that the tools are fragmented, inconsistent and unevenly understood. They vary by lender, investor, product type and overlay. There is no common standard. There is no shared rulebook. There is no uniform method for translating senior housing wealth into responsible, underwritable liquidity.

The verification bottleneck 

Underneath that missing standard is the deeper issue: verification. A retired borrower’s strength is real, but it is scattered across multiple places: assets, liabilities, income sources, property value, equity position, tax status, insurance, title, occupancy and reserves. No two lenders always verify that picture the same way. The facts may be there, but they are rarely assembled into one clear, trusted view.

That is the bottleneck. Not merely credit. Not merely collateral. Verification.

The answer should not be another one-off product. The answer should be a standard. A Senior Equity Access Standard should be considered: a partially insured, agency-backed second-lien framework for qualified older homeowners, built around a uniform verification protocol—one rulebook. Clear eligibility. Verified ownership, available equity, credit history, title status, property condition, occupancy, tax compliance, insurance compliance and the borrower’s ability to maintain the home.

Partial insurance would give lenders a reason to participate at scale. Standardized verification would give regulators and investors a clearer view of risk. Strong borrower protections would reduce the risk of senior homeowners being pushed into products they do not understand.

Smart underwriting, not weak underwriting 

The federal government already underwrites housing risk through FHA, VA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae. The question is not whether public policy belongs in mortgage finance. It already does. The question is whether that policy has kept pace with an aging country. Right now, it has not.

This is not a call for weaker underwriting. It is a call for smarter underwriting. Weak underwriting ignores risk. Smart underwriting verifies it. The guardrails should be built in from the start: independent counseling, suitability standards, ability-to-maintain analysis, proceeds limit, fee transparency, servicing protections, fraud controls and safeguards against undue influence.

A real standard would protect both borrowers and lenders. It would create a safer channel for senior liquidity, rather than leaving older homeowners to navigate a patchwork of credit cards, high-cost loans, deferred maintenance, family pressure or poorly explained financial products.

Not every senior should borrow. Some should downsize. Some should use other assets first. Some should avoid additional debt altogether. A serious standard must acknowledge that. But a serious standard would also recognize that many older homeowners are not weak borrowers. They are under-recognized borrowers. Their financial strength exists in a form the current system does not consistently measure well.

Looking beyond the front door of housing 

The economic logic is straightforward. Equity sitting idle on a balance sheet does not repair a roof, cover a medical bill, replace an HVAC system, pay property taxes, or help someone age in place. When responsibly accessed, that same equity can support households, preserve properties, strengthen local economies and put already-earned capital back to work.

The mortgage industry spends enormous energy on the front door of homeownership: first-time buyers, affordability, access and inventory. That conversation matters. But housing policy cannot stop at the front door. It must also account for what happens after Americans spend a lifetime building equity.

Baby Boomers helped build the modern housing market. Now they hold a record share of its wealth. The equity is real. The borrowers earned it. The credit is often there. The collateral is there. What is missing is a system that can verify the full picture and a standard built to act on it.

That is a solvable problem. We should solve it.

Gerald M. Green is the Founder of Veri-Search.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

This time last year, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a state budget that included sweeping housing reforms that allowed urban residential developers to avoid rigorous environmental reviews.

This year’s budget, which Newsom signed on Monday, does not carry the same historic housing reforms as last year. Instead, it is historic for balancing the budget.

“For the next two years, California will have a zero-dollar deficit,” Newsom said in a video statement.

While balancing the budget, the plan still allocates nearly $1.7 billion toward housing and homelessness programs. The budget signing also comes as hundreds of additional housing reform bills work their way through the legislature, with the Sept. 12 end of the session looming.

Lawmakers are targeting construction costs, permitting delays and wildfire insurance. Two bills aim to revive condo construction by reforming defect liability and raising deposit caps.

Budget details on housing dollars

The budget’s most significant housing intervention nearly doubles the homelessness funding the governor sought. Lawmakers approved $900 million in Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention grants.

It also allocates $500 million for state Low-Income Housing Tax Credits for calendar year 2027, $200 million for the Multifamily Housing Program and $100 million in housing stability funding aimed at keeping renters housed.

The budget also sets the stage for a November ballot measure dubbed the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026. Voters will decide whether to authorize $11.25 billion for affordable housing construction, rental assistance and homeownership programs.

California’s 2026 housing push targets costs, permits and insurance

Last year, the most significant change came from historic reforms to the 1970 California Environmental Quality Act. The overhaul shields apartment and residential projects from lengthy environmental reviews, aiming to boost housing supply and improve affordability.

Developers moved quickly to take advantage of the change, though implementation has not been entirely smooth. Local governments have continued to find ways to delay projects.

California’s legislature is juggling hundreds of housing bills this session, with lawmakers shifting focus from land-use reform to reducing construction costs, cutting permitting delays and shoring up the state’s home insurance market.

One marquee item is already done. Newsom signed Senate Bill 417 in June, placing an $11.25 billion affordable housing bond on the November ballot. The measure includes $10 billion for rental and homeownership programs and $1.25 billion for veterans’ home loans.

On the permitting front, Assembly Bill 1294 would create a standardized statewide housing entitlement application and limit cities’ ability to stall projects by disputing the completeness of applications. Senate Bill 1014 would require cities to disclose infrastructure requirements within 30 days of a housing application and bar them from adding new conditions later.

Several bills target development costs. Assembly Bill 2252 would allow four-story-and-taller buildings to use a single staircase, reducing construction expenses. Senate Bill 1036 would require impact fee credits for projects redeveloping previously developed sites.

On accessory dwelling units, Assembly Bill 956 would allow homeowners to build two detached ADUs per lot and prohibit homeowners associations from blocking compliant units.

Post-wildfire insurance legislation is also moving. Senate Bill 1076 would bar insurers from dropping homeowners who meet fire-safety standards. Assembly Bill 1680 would expand coverage options under the FAIR Plan, the state’s insurer of last resort.

Condo reform bills advance in the legislature

In addition to these measures, two bills targeting California’s near-dormant condominium market cleared the lower chamber and now face Senate scrutiny ahead of the Legislature’s Sept. 12 adjournment deadline.

Assembly Bill 1903, which passed the Assembly 68-0 in May, would give builders the right to repair construction defects before homeowners can sue. Supporters say the change would revive condo construction, which has fallen by roughly 90% over two decades.

A Senate committee postponed its hearing on the bill, a warning sign that Consumer Attorneys of California’s opposition is making headway.

Assembly Bill 1406, which passed the Assembly 41-14 in January, was assigned to a Senate committee. The bill would raise the cap on liquidated damages in new condo sales from 3% to 6% of the purchase price, making it easier for developers to secure construction financing. On Monday, the bill’s author canceled the first Senate hearing on the legislation set for June 30, reflecting opposition influence.

The California Association of Realtors opposes the measure, saying in a notice to members that it “dismantles strong, long-standing consumer protections for buyers, putting their savings, life-changing sums of money, at risk to finance the condominium projects.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

In my last HousingWire column, I focused on reviewing AI-generated listing remarks before they reach the MLS. That was about what AI says about a property. This follow-up is about the line between effective marketing and misrepresentation.

A listing video may show a drone-style approach, a smooth walkthrough, or a perfectly furnished interior. But what if the drone never flew, the camera never moved, or the furnishings were digitally added?

That is the disclosure problem agents need to solve — now.

AI-assisted visual marketing helps buyers understand a property’s potential. Virtual staging, photo-to-video reels, and AI-generated tours make listings more appealing. But when technology changes a buyer’s perception of condition, features, surroundings or the way the media was captured, disclosure becomes more than simple compliance. It becomes a matter of trust.

The law is beginning to catch up

California’s Assembly Bill 723, effective January 1, 2026, requires real estate brokers, salespersons or those acting on their behalf to disclose when digitally altered images are used and to provide access to original, unaltered versions. The law applies when software or AI adds, removes, or changes visible elements such as furniture, appliances, flooring, landscaping, façades, floor plans, window views or neighboring properties.

At the same time, California draws an important line. Basic edits — lighting, cropping, sharpening, and color correction — are permitted as long as they do not change how the property actually looks.

Wisconsin goes further. The 2025 Act 69, effective in 2027, requires disclosure when advertising is altered using technology, including AI, in a way that creates a false or misleading impression. The scope matters. Marketing no longer ends with photos — it now includes reels, animations and generated video.

New York is moving in the same direction. Regulators have already warned that AI-generated listing imagery can produce misleading or exaggerated representations. A pending bill, S9584, would go further by defining “digital representations” to include images, video and immersive media — and requiring disclosure when those include material alterations or generated elements.

The details vary by state. The professional standard should not: do not let AI create a false impression.

The question is not whether AI was used

Agents use technology every day to increase clarity, exposure, and presentation. The better question is this: Did the technology change what a reasonable buyer would believe about the property or how the media was captured?

A virtually staged room can help buyers visualize space — when it is clearly labeled.

A repaired roof that has not been repaired, a greener lawn that does not exist, a removed utility pole, or an improved view creates a different issue.

So does an AI-generated video that appears to show a drone approach or a walkthrough when the source material was only still photography. The images may be real. The experience is not.

If a buyer believes they are watching actual footage, that is a disclosure issue.

Before publishing AI-assisted listing media, agents should apply a five-part test.

First, did technology add to, remove or materially change anything about the property? Review the final asset as a buyer would. If visible features, condition, layout, or surroundings have been altered, treat it differently from ordinary photo enhancement.

Second, does the video present movement or perspective that was never actually captured? If it shows aerial-style motion, camera transitions, or a walkthrough created from still images, disclose that directly: “AI-generated video created from property photographs. No drone or walkthrough footage was captured.”

Third, could the change affect how a buyer understands the property? Some edits are cosmetic. Others can affect perceived value. Condition, landscaping, views, room size, nearby properties, signs of damage, or features that do not actually exist should be treated carefully. If the visual change could influence whether a buyer schedules a showing, writes an offer, or negotiates price, it should be disclosed.

Fourth, will the buyer actually see the disclosure? Disclosure should travel with the media. A virtually staged image should be labeled near the image. An AI-generated listing video should include clear language in the video, caption, or description. The point is simple: buyers should not have to hunt for the explanation.

Fifth, can the agent show what was real and what was changed? Agents should keep the original photos, edited versions, generated videos, and disclosure language used with each asset. Even when a specific law does not require that documentation, it is a smart professional habit. If a question comes up later, the agent and brokerage should be able to explain what was original, what was altered, and how it was disclosed.

The disclosure does not need to sound like it came from a legal department. In most cases, plain language is better.

An agent could say:

“Virtually staged. Furniture shown is not included.”

“Image has been digitally altered. Original photo available on request or at the provided link.”

“Video was created from listing photos using AI.”

“Drone-style movement is simulated. No drone footage was captured.”

The wording can vary by platform, brokerage policy, and state law. The important part is that a buyer can quickly understand what was real, what was staged, and what was generated.

That kind of clarity does not hurt the marketing. It makes the marketing more trustworthy.

AI allows agents to produce more polished marketing faster than ever. But the goal is not to create the most impressive version of a property. It is to represent the property accurately.

In the last column, the focus was on reviewing AI-generated language before it reaches the public. The same principle applies here.

The advantage is not using AI. It is using it with judgment.

Show the home. Show its power. But if AI invents part of the experience, make sure the buyer knows where reality ends and technology begins.

Paul Parker has spent over 25 years in sales and sales management. He is the founder of AIandRealtors.com and author of Crypto Confidence.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

President Donald Trump on Monday characterized the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act as “a yawn,” following an abrupt cancellation of a signing ceremony for the legislation last week.

The comments came as Trump reinforced prioritization of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act as his top domestic priority.

“It’s so unimportant compared to the SAVE America Act,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office regarding the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. “When I look at the bill, it’s a bill. When I look at the SAVE America Act, it’s about saving America.”

He added, “It’s a yawn. To me, compared to the SAVE America Act, just about everything is a big yawn.”

The president also expressed doubt about the SAVE America Act’s prospects in the Senate.

“[It’s] probably not going to happen because we have four Republican senators, maybe five, that just won’t vote for it. It’s crazy,” Trump told reporters.

Legislation hold-up

Last Wednesday, Trump halted plans for a signing ceremony tied to the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act — after announcing on Truth Social that he would not sign it into law until Congress passed the SAVE America Act

“Today’s Housing News Conference and Signing is hereby cancelled until such time as we pass the desperately needed SAVE AMERICA ACT, which I consider to be a National Emergency,” he wrote.

The housing measure — aiming to expand housing supply and reduce homeownership costs — had passed the House 358-32 after clearing the Senate.

Passed by the House in February, the the SAVE America Act would impose nationwide voter identification requirements and proof-of-citizenship standards.

It has drawn near unified Republican support but faces Democratic opposition that makes it unlikely to clear the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster threshold.

What comes next

Under congressional procedure, if the president neither signs nor vetoes a bill within 10 days, excluding Sundays, while Congress remains in session, it automatically becomes law.

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act had been seen as a rare compromise product between Republicans and Democrats.

Lawmakers involved in housing negotiations have emphasized a months-long effort to craft a package acceptable to both chambers — part of a broader push to address supply constraints and affordability pressures in the national housing market.

This article was written by Jonathan Delozier and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation. It was reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

As homebuilders grapple with questions of scale, access to capital and long-term competitiveness, many of their largest suppliers appear to be navigating similar strategic pressures.

Carlisle Companies‘ unsolicited pursuit of Owens Corning, reported Monday by the Wall Street Journal, suggests that the forces reshaping homebuilding boardrooms are also beginning to reshape the building-products companies that supply them.

Whether the transaction ultimately succeeds may prove less important than the question it raises: Has scale itself become one of the industry’s most valuable strategic assets?

While the exact value of the latest bid isn’t disclosed, it would reportedly be a “well-over $10 billion deal”. However, Owens Corning has yet to engage in meaningful discussions with Carlisle, suggesting that any potential deal remains highly preliminary and far from a slam dunk.

While the bid’s fate is uncertain, it has the potential to transform Carlisle into a far larger and more diversified building products manufacturer.

That logic increasingly resembles the thinking emerging elsewhere across residential construction.

Homebuilders, distributors and manufacturers alike are confronting a business environment where growth through operating execution alone is becoming more difficult. Technology investment, supply-chain resilience, customer concentration, labor shortages, insurance costs and capital requirements increasingly reward organizations capable of operating broader platforms rather than simply larger businesses.

In that sense, Carlisle’s interest in Owens Corning appears to reflect more than a desire to add revenue. It reflects an effort to assemble a more comprehensive building-envelope platform capable of serving customers across a wider range of residential and commercial applications.

If the acquisition gains steam, Carlisle could expand upon its current offerings, which include commercial roofing and waterproofing, and grow its presence in residential construction. 

Owens Corning’s points of strength

Owens Corning primarily operates in residential construction, but it also has a significant commercial presence, bringing something increasingly valuable to any strategic acquirer: optionality.

Rather than depending on a single end market, its revenue spans new residential construction, residential repair and remodeling, commercial construction and non-discretionary repair activity. That diversification helps reduce cyclicality while providing exposure to multiple spending streams across the built environment.

According to an Owens Corning Q2 2026 investor presentation from May, 26% of the company’s revenue comes from non-residential projects. Meanwhile, 23% of revenue comes from new residential construction, 17% from the roughly $500 billion residential R&R sector and 34% from non-discretionary repair.

In today’s uncertain construction economy, that balance may be every bit as valuable as market share. Owens Corning focuses on three categories. 

Insulation

The company is a leader in insulation for both residential and commercial products, with slightly more revenue coming from residential. According to company materials, Owens Corning’s insulation revenue has been relatively flat at about $3.7 billion annually since 2022. About 80% of that revenue comes from North American sales, while 20% derives from Europe. 

Grand View Research reports that the North American insulation market is about $16.7 billion as of 2025, indicating that Owens Corning commands nearly 18% of the market. 

Building code changes have increased demand for higher-performance insulation in North American homes, creating a favorable market opportunity. Owens Corning estimates that the average home now contains roughly 30% more insulation by weight than it did 10 to 15 years ago, indicating a growing market opportunity. 

Roofing

Owens Corning’s roofing business, which peaked at $4.6 billion in revenue in 2024, generated $4.4 billion last year, nearly 90% of which came from business within the United States. Based on estimates that value the U.S. roofing market at about $33.5 billion in 2026, Owens Corning accounts for roughly 11% to 12% of the overall market.

About two-thirds of the firm’s roofing revenue comes from shingles, while the rest comes from components sales. 

Evercore ISI’s Stephen Kim, in a research note, wrote that the takeover bid, even if it doesn’t come to fruition, reveals the “undervalued nature of the company’s roofing business.”

“Over the past year, the segment’s resilience in the face of declining industry volume set the stage for investors to rethink what is an appropriate multiple for this business. And while near-term challenges in the industry might prove to be a distraction over the next few months, we now believe the increased focus on roofing long-term earnings potential provides the missing catalyst for the shares,” Kim wrote. 

Doors

Owens Corning entered the door business after it acquired Masonite International for $3.9 billion in 2024. In 2025, doors generated just over $2 billion in revenue, about 75% of which came from the United States, representing a small slice of the roughly $30 billion U.S. doors-and-windows market. 

Why Owens Corning?

While Carlisle Companies has a well-established track record of acquiring smaller rivals, an acquisition of Owens Corning would be by far its largest deal to date. Carlisle generated about $5.0 billion in revenue in 2025, roughly half of Owens Corning’s top line. However, Carlisle’s $15.7 billion market capitalization exceeds Owens Corning’s roughly $11 billion valuation.

If the potential moves forward, it would significantly increase Carlisle’s scale. It would also broaden its product portfolio and greatly expand its exposure to the residential market. About 82% of Carlisle’s revenue came from commercial projects, with only 18% from residential. 

Carlisle has significantly more strength in areas like waterproofing systems, building envelope technologies, commercial reroofing and replacement and single-ply commercial roofing membranes, which are designed to protect flat roofs. 

Owens Corning, meanwhile, finds its strength in residential asphalt shingles, composite materials, doors and fiberglass insulation. 

If the two businesses merge, Carlisle could expand into these product niches and gain significant exposure in the residential market, both new construction and repair. The combined business would create a leading roofing and insulation supplier, with additional offerings like composites, weatherproofing and doors. 

Increasing M&A in building materials

Carlisle’s bid to acquire Owens Corning, even if it proves unsuccessful, signals that the highly fragmented building products distribution industry could undergo increasing consolidation in the years ahead. 

The industry has already experienced significant M&A activity in recent years, led by the likes of QXO. The Brad Jacobs-backed company announced in April that it will acquire TopBuild for $17 billion, a deal that the two companies’ stockholders approved on Monday. QXO also bought Kodiak Building Partners for $2.25 billion earlier this year. 

The Webb Analytics 2025 Deals Report found that 2025 generated the highest level of building materials M&A activity in a decade based on facilities acquired. Even though deal volume declined 30% and there were fewer acquirers, larger transactions played an outsized role. 

Just four of the 120 reported deals last year represented 85% of all supply facilities acquired. This suggests that the industry’s largest players, like QXO, The Home Depot, Lowe’s and Builders FirstSource, are becoming increasingly influential in driving consolidation and capturing market share.

Another boardroom question

Carlisle’s unsolicited approach also arrives at a moment when public-company boards across housing-related industries are increasingly confronting similar strategic questions.

For homebuilders, recent transactions involving Taylor Morrison, Tri Pointe Homes, Landsea Homes and others have underscored how boards are weighing independence against the benefits of larger capital platforms.

Building-products manufacturers appear to be entering a comparable phase.

The question is no longer simply whether companies can continue growing independently.

It is whether shareholders may ultimately be better served through combinations capable of accelerating growth, broadening product portfolios and improving long-term competitive positioning.

Whether Owens Corning’s board reaches that conclusion remains to be seen.

But Carlisle’s proposal suggests those conversations are no longer confined to homebuilders.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Bestowed with the good fortune of being near the 585 acres of Prospect Park, Crown Heights runs from Flatbush Avenue to the west, Atlantic Avenue to the north, Ralph Avenue to the east, and Empire Boulevard to the south; parts of this sprawling Brooklyn neighborhood border the Brooklyn Museum, the 52-acre Botanic Garden, and the Brooklyn Children’s Museum. As one of New York City’s most architecturally significant historic neighborhoods, Crown Heights offers magnificent mansions, row houses, churches, and apartment buildings old and new, with more on the way. Just one part of the city’s eclectic Caribbean community, Crown Heights is also one of the city’s most culturally significant neighborhoods. Recent years have seen the arrival of dozens of dining, shopping, and cultural destinations on the diverse and vibrant neighborhood’s main streets, and with it, new rental developments. Below, explore a few of the neighborhood’s best new rental buildings.

Some of the properties featured here are part of paid partnerships, which help support our editorial work. All buildings are selected and independently reviewed by the 6sqft team.

The Arcadian
975 Nostrand Avenue

Designed by ODA Architecture, The Arcadian at 975 Nostrand Avenue puts residents at the border of southern Crown Heights and Prospect Lefferts Gardens. Prospect Park and the Brooklyn Botanic Garden are just a few blocks west.

The LEED-certified building contains 328 apartments from studios to two-bedrooms, with central heating and cooling, in-unit laundry, and oversized windows that filter light through built-in solar shades. Notable design details include hardwood floors, kitchens with stone countertops and stainless steel appliances, and tiled baths.

Amenities at the pet-friendly building include an attended lobby, a fitness center, a game room, a karaoke room, a maker’s space/art studio, a library, a lounge, a children’s playroom, a dog run, a central courtyard, and a rooftop terrace with grills. Residents also get a 111-space below-grade parking garage in addition to private storage and bike storage. The Sterling Street 2/5 subway stop is one block away.

Current availabilities at The Arcadian start at $2,708/month for a studio and go up to $7,091/month for a three-bedroom unit. See all available apartments here.

The Gregory
991 St. John’s Place

Rendering courtesy of PKSB Architects

The Gregory at 991 St. John’s Place sits within the St. Gregory the Great Roman Catholic Church complex, designed by Frank J. Helmle and Harvey Wiley Corbett in the 1920s. GEMA Capital Partners and PKSB Architects oversaw the conversion of the historic schoolhouse into a multi-family rental building offering studios and one-, two-, and three-bedroom units. The seven-story building offers 40 unique homes with oversized historic replica windows and soaring ceiling heights ranging from 9 to 13 feet.

Image courtesy of Envision Studio Inc.

The architects preserved the building’s original facade and architectural detailing during the restoration of the building’s structure. Residences feature dishwashers, energy-efficient appliances, and air conditioning; some units include patios or balconies.

Amenities at the pet-friendly building include a shared laundry room, a gym, multiple garden spaces, and a rooftop terrace. Residents also get assigned package lockers and bike storage lockers. Nearby subway options include the 2, 3, and 5 trains.

Currently available units at The Gregory range from $3,195/month for a studio to $4,100/month for a one-bedroom.

Mason Gray
959 Sterling Place

Rendering courtesy of Morris Adjmi Architects

Designed by Morris Adjmi Architects, Mason Gray is a seven-story brick rental building at 959 Sterling Place offering 158 apartments. Landmarked as part of the Crown Heights Historic District, the property is unique in that it is also home to a 19th-century Romanesque Revival complex currently occupied by the Hebron Seventh Day Adventist Church and School.

Morris Adjmi designed Mason Gray to stand out while being integrated into its historic surroundings. Two seven-story volumes containing the apartments are connected by a shared lobby that frames the church. The building’s brick facade features intricate patterns that create dimension.

Rendering courtesy of Morris Adjmi Architects

Within are studios and one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments, all of which feature open and airy layouts, high-end appliances, and multiple exposures. Many offer private outdoor spaces. Design details include custom kitchen cabinetry, Blomberg appliances, mosaic-tiled baths, central heating and air conditioning, and in-unit laundry.

Amenities include a doorman and live-in super, a fitness center, coworking spaces, a cinema room, a landscaped courtyard, and on-site parking, all near Brower Park and the 3 train.

Availabilities at the building range from a $2,871/month studio to a $4,659/month two-bedroom. See all available apartments here.

Loden
54 Crown Street

Inspired by the neighboring Brooklyn Botanic Garden and Prospect Park, the 17-story Loden is a luxury rental building with an emphasis on its connection with the surrounding nature. Oversized windows invite natural light; a verdant garden lounge, courtyard, and roof terrace facilitate outdoor living.

Designed by Hill West Architects with interiors by Whitehall and Markzeff Design, Loden offers studios and one- and two-bedroom apartments. Units feature tranquil color palettes, stainless steel appliances, hardwood floors, European-style kitchen cabinetry, and in-unit laundry.

Amenities include a fitness center and yoga room, a private dining room, a pet spa, bike storage, a smart package room, a co-working space, a playroom, and a 24/7 concierge. A rooftop deck offers treetop views framed by the Manhattan skyline.

Loden is just half a block from the Brooklyn Botanic Garden and a short walk to Prospect Park, near the Brooklyn Museum, the main branch of the Brooklyn Public Library, Medgar Evers College, and several subway lines, as well as the restaurants and bars on Franklin Avenue.

Current availabilities range from $3,425/month for a studio to $6,135 for a two-bedroom. See all availabilities at Loden here.

The Arch
1101 President Street

Rendering courtesy of Pax Brooklyn

As part of the redeveloped Bedford Union Armory complex in Crown Heights at 1101 President Street, The Arch rises 16 stories, with 355 rental units within. The former military complex was designed in 1903 for use by the U.S. Army’s Cavalry Troop C. Redeveloped by BFC Partners and designed by Marvel, The Arch is now part of the Major R. Owens Health and Wellness Center, a new 60,000-square-foot community center within the restored former armory building. The center includes an indoor swimming pool, three basketball courts, a soccer field, dance studios, and facilities for local nonprofits.

Photo credit: QuallsBenson

The residential section of the project includes 415 units in two buildings on President Street, both designed by Marvel. Apartments feature modern hardware accents, stainless steel appliances, in-unit washers and dryers, and private balconies in select apartments.

Amenities include a rooftop deck, a business center with private conference rooms, state-of-the-art indoor and outdoor fitness centers, a lounge, an outdoor kitchen with grilling stations, storage, and on-site parking for an extra cost.

Current availabilities range from $2,995/month for a one-bedroom to $6,500/month for a 970-square-foot three-bedroom with a private wrap-around terrace. See all availabilities at The Arch here.

The Dean
1040 Dean Street

Image courtesy of CityRealty

ODA Architects designed this eight-story, 133,582-square-foot rental project using the firm’s signature glass-clad aesthetic on the vibrant corner of Dean Street and Franklin Avenue. The Dean offers condominium-style rentals with amenities to match, plus easy access to transportation and neighborhood nightlife, recreation, and shopping spots.

The building’s design includes a unique angular courtyard, asymmetrical balcony spacing, and a stepped wooden lobby staircase. In the industrial-chic lobby, you’ll find a spacious lounge with exposed woodwork. A second-floor lounge area features a planted terrace with picnic areas and a year-round greenhouse.

Image courtesy of CityRealty

The building’s 120 apartments range from studios to penthouses; floor-to-ceiling windows offer impressive city views. Additional highlights include recessed lighting, walk-in closets, and wine racks. Bathrooms have stone-clad tubs and rainfall shower heads.

Amenities include a doorman, garage parking, a fully-furnished roof deck with a commercial kitchen and space for private events, a theater room, a business lounge, laundry facilities on each floor, and a refrigerated package room. A state-of-the-art gym includes a yoga room. For public transportation, there’s easy access to the A/C/S trains for an easy commute into Manhattan and the rest of Brooklyn.

Current availabilities include a two-bedroom unit for $4,236/month.

Pacific House
1010 Pacific Street

Rendering courtesy of StudioSC

Located between Grand and Classon Avenues, the nine-story Pacific House at 1010 Pacific Street offers 175 apartments ranging from studios to two-bedrooms. Developed by the NY Building Associates Inc., and designed by J. Frankl Associates and StudiosC, the building’s warm brick facade integrates well with the neighborhood’s row houses.

Apartments offer open-concept layouts, oak floors, energy-efficient appliances, and air conditioning. Modern kitchens and baths feature matte black fixtures and fittings. Kitchens have
polished Silestone countertops with honed mosaic stone backsplashes and dining islands. Some units have private outdoor terraces.

Amenities include a double-height lobby, a fitness center, a co-working space with a cafe, a library bridge with reading nooks, a kids’ playroom, a media room with a bar, and a pet spa. The expansive rooftop has landscaped walking paths, lounge seating, a play area, grills, and an outdoor firepit. The building also has a private garage with assigned spaces and electric vehicle charging stations. Nearby public transit options are many, including S, A, C, 2, 3, 4, and 5 subway lines.

Current availabilities range from $3,410/month for a one-bedroom to $4,950/month for a two-bedroom. 

409 Eastern Parkway

409 Eastern Parkway. Photo by Tdorante10 on Wikimedia

Brooklyn’s Eastern Parkway, designed by Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux, is considered to be the world’s first parkway. The historic boulevard was constructed in the 1860s to connect Prospect Park with surrounding neighborhoods and beyond. 409 Eastern Parkway sits just one block from bustling Franklin Avenue and two blocks from the Brooklyn Museum, Botanic Garden, and Prospect Park.

Photo via 409 Eastern Parkway

The building’s 186 studio, one- and two-bedroom homes feature an open-floor layout with wide-plank oak flooring and in-unit washer/dryers. Kitchens have Caesarstone countertops and stainless steel appliances; marble bathrooms have Kohler fixtures and soaking tubs.

The building offers a part-time doorman and virtual concierge, and a package room. Three floors of amenities include a fitness center, pet spa, game room with a wet bar, children’s playroom, co-working spaces, a landscaped roof with bocce ball courts, a central landscaped courtyard, a residents’ lounge with a screening area, kitchenette and central fireplace, and a library.

Current availabilities include a one-bedroom for $3,800/month and a 1,000-square-foot two-bedroom with a terrace and city views for $6,695/month. See all availabilities at 409 Eastern Parkway here.

RELATED:

The post 8 best new apartment buildings in Crown Heights first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

With less than 48 hours to go before the start of a two-day hearing regarding Zillow’s preliminary injunction motion in its antitrust lawsuit against Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) and Compass International Holdings, the Chicagoland MLS is seeking to compel arbitration with the listing portal giant. 

In documents filed on Monday, MRED told the court that Zillow had agreed to arbitrate any disputes that came out of its IDX and VOW agreements in its contract with the MLS. 

Zillow has argued that these arbitration agreements are unenforceable because of ambiguity in the agreement’s language.

In contrast, MRED wrote in its filing that the “nature of intended third-party beneficiary status, as well as treatises and case law all confirm” that the MLS is entitled to enforce these arbitration clauses. 

Additionally, MRED has argued that its “Participation Agreement,” which governs access to the MLS’s database, is separate from its IDX access agreements, which are central to the lawsuit and have their own mandatory arbitration clauses that Zillow must abide by. 

Due to this, MRED has asked Judge John Tharp, who is overseeing the case, to stay all non-arbitrable claims and to deny Zillow’s preliminary injunction request. In the filing, MRED argued that the preliminary injunction would be redundant, as the court has already prevented MRED from suspending its listing feed to Zillow, as the preliminary injunction seeks to do, through a temporary restraining order. 

In an emailed statement, a Zillow spokesperson told HousingWire that this was an attempt by MRED to “move this case behind closed doors, away from the public scrutiny that anticompetitive conduct deserves.” 

“The public has a right to know what MRED and Compass did to Chicagoland buyers and sellers, and a right to see it resolved in open court,” the spokesperson added. 

As of Tuesday afternoon, the court had not ruled on MRED’s motion. A two-day hearing regarding Zillow’s preliminary injunction motion, which was filed in mid-May, is set to begin on Wednesday. 

The hearing is just one part of an antitrust lawsuit Zillow filed in mid-May, claiming that MRED and Compass conspired to withhold listing data and pressure Zillow to carry private “hidden” listings nationwide.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

As we approach Jobs Thursday, certain Federal Reserve members have still not changed their tune about rate hikes, even with oil prices back down to $70 today. Why haven’t mortgage rates dropped along with oil prices? Because Fed policy has shifted, and some Fed member want more rate hikes.

Today, I will use Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack as an example, looking at her remarks on CNBC. 

Here are some of Hammack’s comments in the CNBC interview:

  • “If consumer data holds up, Fed policy may not be restrictive enough.”
  • “Inflation is still too high, Fed may need to consider rate hikes.”
  • “Job market is right around full employment, growth looks good.”

Hammack doesn’t place much weight on falling oil prices; in fact, she says they might lead to better spending and more inflation.

And in her view, the AI story is inflationary, not disinflationary, due to the growth in data centers. She used the example of higher electricity costs, which has been a common negative theme due to the massive energy used by these data centers. Also, the AI boom is causing chip shortages and raising prices, as seen when Apple recently increased prices on their products.

Data centers are becoming a core factor in the Fed’s more hawkish stance, and probably a big reason AI popularity has been declining lately.

Hammack believes in her full-employment model, which means the current labor data is fine in her view. In fact, she was the least concerned Fed member last year when job growth hit 21st-century lows, so it’s not shocking to hear her say we are at full employment. 

Today’s job openings report gave her more ammo for rate hikes, because the job openings data is no longer declining, as it did toward the end of 2025. In fact, it’s been rising in the BLS jobs report as well. A lot of people hate the job openings data, but the Fed loves it, and they make the rules, folks.

chart visualization

The Federal Reserve is big on jobless claims data, and it’s still near historical lows, so Hammack has a lot of ammunition for rate hikes, given her belief that the labor market is strong. Since late 2022, I have warned people not to talk about a recession until this data line breaks above 323,000. We are still under 250,000 here, with no noticeable uptrend for years now, so it’s not shocking we haven’t had a recession yet.

Hammack is just one person, like Kevin Warsh, but to me, she is the ringleader of the rate-hike movement at the Fed. Neil Kashkari of the Minneapolis Fed has said he wants just one rate hike in 2026, but I believe Hammack wants all the rate cuts from last year reversed, since she wasn’t really into them. All this makes for an interesting Jobs Thursday and the next Fed meeting in July.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

New York City will create a new program for housing vouchers that will expand rental assistance under a handshake budget agreement announced on Tuesday. The mayor and the City Council announced a $125.8 billion budget deal, which invests $300 million over two years in a new voucher program that could reach about 30,000 more New Yorkers. The agreement also requires Mayor Zohran Mamdani to drop his appeal of a court ruling ordering the expansion of the voucher program known as CityFHEPS, ending a legal battle that began under former Mayor Eric Adams over ballooning costs.

Under the agreement, the Council will vote on a preconsidered introduction, sponsored by Council Member Pierina Sanchez, to create a new rental assistance program aimed at reaching more New Yorkers facing eviction and those in shelter who are not currently eligible for the existing CityFHEPS program.

Administered by the city’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development, the new voucher program will establish a “sustainable framework” for annual evaluation moving forward, with “guardrails” on the program that impose cost controls.

The Council has committed $175 million in fiscal year 2027 and $125 million in fiscal year 2028.

Once passed, the Mamdani administration will drop its appeal of the lawsuit, marking the culmination of a lengthy legal battle that has threatened housing support for thousands of families that would have been eligible for vouchers.

“Every New Yorker deserves a safe, affordable home, and this agreement will help more families avoid eviction and homelessness,” Council Speaker Julie Menin said. “Housing vouchers are a smart investment that save taxpayers money by preventing homelessness before it happens.”

“Keeping families in their homes means children can remain in their schools, parents can stay connected to work, and communities remain stable.”

The new program would increase the income eligibility threshold for New Yorkers living at or below 50 percent of the area median income. It would also extend eligibility to individuals living in non–Department of Homeless Services shelters, including runaway and homeless youth, justice-involved individuals, and New Yorkers displaced by fires or other vacate orders.

CityFHEPS currently serves roughly 65,000 households, or 140,000 people, making it one of the largest rental assistance programs in the nation. The program allows low-income New Yorkers to pay 30 percent of their income toward rent, with the city covering the remainder.

The program was established by former Mayor Bill de Blasio in 2018 as a consolidation of several voucher programs to provide rental assistance to people living in shelters or at risk of homelessness.

In 2023, the Council passed a legislation package that expanded eligibility for the program by raising the income eligibility threshold, eliminating the shelter-stay requirement, and removing select work and source-of-income requirements.

The changes were meant to make the program more proactive by keeping families at risk of eviction in their homes, rather than requiring them to enter shelters before becoming eligible for assistance.

Adams vetoed the legislation, prompting the Council to override the veto. The administration then filed a lawsuit over policy concerns and the program’s estimated $17 billion price tag. According to the Council, housing vouchers cost as little as $54 per day per family, compared with as much as $270 per day for shelter costs.

Last July, after securing the Democratic nomination, Mamdani called Adams’ opposition to CityFHEPS a “ridiculous waste of time during a housing crisis” in a post on X. His (now defunct) campaign website also pledged: “Zohran will drop lawsuits against CityFHEPS and ensure expansion proceeds as scheduled and per city law,” as 6sqft previously reported.

However, in February, while facing a projected $7 billion budget deficit, Mamdani suggested he no longer intended to support the program’s expansion. After failing to reach a deal with housing advocates over the program, Mamdani appealed the court ruling in March, setting the stage for another drawn-out legal battle.

The new program includes cost-saving measures aimed at addressing prior fiscal concerns. Under the agreement, the mayor and Council will be required to negotiate the program’s scale annually.

Robert Desir, a staff attorney at the Legal Aid Society, called the deal a major victory for New Yorkers in shelters and those facing eviction and homelessness.

“This agreement secures a $175 million appropriation, modernizes the city’s rental assistance framework, and brings this needless litigation to a close,” Desir said in a statement. “More New Yorkers will now be able to access the support they need before losing their homes, reaffirming what we’ve long known: investing in real assistance is both the humane choice and the fiscally responsible one.”

RELATED:

The post New NYC housing voucher program to be created as part of city budget deal first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Congress has approved what lawmakers describe as the largest federal housing affordability package in roughly three decades, passing a bipartisan bill aimed at increasing home construction, expanding access to homeownership, and limiting Wall Street’s role in the single-family housing market.

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, led by Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, passed the Senate by an 85-5 vote before clearing the House. A White House signing ceremony planned for President Donald Trump was later canceled.

The legislation targets a housing market that has become increasingly difficult for many Americans. National home prices have climbed roughly 54% since 2020, mortgage payments have nearly doubled, and economists estimate the United States remains short by more than 4 million homes. Mortgage rates remain near 6.5%, continuing to strain affordability.

Rather than relying on one major program, the legislation combines more than 50 separate housing provisions designed to increase supply.

Among the most significant changes, the bill removes the longstanding federal requirement that manufactured homes be built on permanent steel chassis. Housing experts say the change could reduce construction costs by $5,000 to $10,000 per home while allowing more flexible designs, including basements and second stories.

The measure also streamlines portions of the permitting process by allowing certain projects built between previously approved developments to bypass additional environmental reviews. It establishes grants encouraging communities to create standardized “pattern books” of preapproved housing designs that can shorten construction timelines.

Federal funding will also increasingly reward local governments that approve and build more housing.

The legislation includes several provisions aimed directly at buyers.

It creates programs designed to expand access to small-dollar mortgages, making financing easier for buyers purchasing lower-priced homes, while also increasing housing opportunities for military veterans.

Banks will also receive greater flexibility to invest in affordable housing through expanded Public Welfare Investment limits.

Perhaps the most closely watched provision targets institutional investors.

The legislation would prohibit large investment firms, including private equity companies, from owning more than 350 single-family homes. Supporters argue large investors have intensified competition by purchasing homes with cash and converting them into rental properties, making it harder for families to buy homes.

Economists generally believe the legislation could improve affordability over time but caution that meaningful price reductions will likely take years.

The bill does not provide major new federal funding for home construction, while zoning decisions and permitting remain largely under local government control. Mortgage rates, another key factor affecting affordability, also remain outside Congress’ authority and will continue to depend largely on inflation and Federal Reserve policy.

Housing economists describe the package as an important step toward increasing supply while warning that expectations should remain realistic.

Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan said Congress has addressed several federal obstacles, but emphasized that mayors, governors, and local governments will ultimately determine how many new homes are built.

For Republicans, the legislation represents a major effort to address housing affordability ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, making the cancellation of Trump’s planned signing ceremony an unexpected political footnote. The White House nevertheless described the bill as advancing the president’s housing agenda.

The legislation also reshapes several industries.

Homebuilders, particularly manufacturers of modular and manufactured housing, gain new opportunities for expansion. Mortgage lenders receive incentives to serve buyers seeking smaller loans, while institutional investors face new restrictions on building large single-family rental portfolios.

For American families, however, the benefits will depend on how quickly local communities approve and build additional housing.

The legislation creates new opportunities to increase supply, but the ultimate test will occur not in Washington, but in cities and towns across the country where those homes are—or are not—ultimately constructed.

JBizNews Desk
© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or distribution without written permission is prohibited.

On:

The New York City Rent Guidelines Board voted Thursday night to freeze rents on roughly 1 million rent-stabilized apartments for the next two years, handing Mayor Zohran Mamdani one of the signature victories of his young administration.

The 7-1 vote marks the first two-year rent freeze in the board’s history and fulfills one of Mamdani’s central campaign promises. The mayor appointed six of the board’s nine members.

The decision applies to rent-stabilized apartments in buildings with six or more units built before 1974, along with apartments receiving certain tax incentives or subsidies. The freeze covers leases beginning between October 1, 2026, and September 30, 2027.

Roughly 2 million New Yorkers live in rent-stabilized housing, representing about 40% of the city’s housing stock. For tenants who have faced years of rising rents, the decision offers immediate financial relief.

“Freeze the rent” became one of the defining messages of Mamdani’s mayoral campaign, and he called the board’s decision “a historic victory for New York City tenants,” saying it reflected both financial data and extensive public testimony.

Landlords see the situation very differently.

The Real Estate Board of New York warned the decision would worsen the city’s housing crisis, while the New York Apartment Association argued the freeze comes as building owners continue absorbing higher insurance premiums, labor costs, utility bills, and maintenance expenses. According to the board’s own research, operating costs for landlords increased 5.3% over the past year.

The larger concern is the long-term condition of the city’s housing stock.

With rents frozen while expenses continue climbing, owners of older rent-regulated buildings have fewer financial resources available for repairs and renovations. State records show the number of rent-stabilized apartments registered as vacant increased from roughly 49,000 in April 2024 to more than 57,000 one year later, reflecting situations where renovation costs exceed the rental income landlords are legally allowed to collect.

When restoring an apartment no longer makes financial sense, many owners simply leave units vacant, reducing the overall supply of affordable housing.

This freeze carries greater consequences than previous ones because of changes made to New York’s rent laws in 2019, which eliminated many opportunities for landlords to increase rents after apartments became vacant. Earlier rent freezes under former Mayor Bill de Blasio applied only to one-year leases. Thursday’s action represents the first freeze ever covering two-year leases.

Housing analysts also warn about broader market effects. Rent freezes function as price controls that benefit existing tenants but may discourage investment in rental housing while pushing more prospective renters into the city’s unregulated market, where competition can drive prices even higher.

The vote itself was dramatic.

Hours before the meeting, landlord representative Christina Smyth resigned from the board, arguing it had stopped functioning as an independent fact-finding body and had predetermined its outcome. The New York Apartment Association has already indicated it is exploring legal action against the decision.

For tenants, the vote provides certainty during a period of rising housing costs that remain the largest monthly expense for most households.

For property owners, however, the central economic question remains unresolved: whether aging apartment buildings can continue receiving the investment necessary to remain safe, occupied, and financially sustainable while rental income remains frozen.

Mayor Mamdani has pledged to help reduce operating costs for landlords through lower insurance expenses and expanded housing construction.

Whether those efforts will be enough to preserve New York’s aging rent-stabilized housing stock—or whether the freeze accelerates building deterioration—will shape the city’s housing market for years to come.

JBizNews Desk
© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or distribution without written permission is prohibited.

On:

Nonqualified mortgage (non-QM) originations are on track to set another post-crisis record in 2026, as debt-service-coverage ratio (DSCR) and investor loans fuel growth in a still high-rate environment, according to a new Bank of America Securities report.

In terms of non-QM securitizations, insurance demand for bonds remains strong and investors are looking for high-quality, jumbo-like loans flowing through the channel — referred to in the report as “fumbos.”

Non-QM production is expected to reach $175 billion in 2026, compared to $108 billion in 2025. DSCR and investor products now account for about half of all non-QM collateral.

Meanwhile, non-QM securitization issuance will rise from $80 billion in 2025 to roughly $100 billion in 2026. About 70% of non-QM loans are securitized, with the remaining loans primarily purchased by insurance companies.

“Year to date, securitization volumes are running at $57 billion, and we think higher mortgage rates should result in a modest slowdown in the second half of 2026,” BofA analysts wrote on Monday.

High-quality asset pools

Part of the increase in non-QM securitization volumes stems from high-quality, jumbo-like loans flowing through the channel. These large-balance loans are sometimes referred to in the market as “fumbo” loans, they said.

For 2026 originations, loans with balances above $1 million account for about 28% of new non-QM production, and loans above $1.5 million make up 15%, the report said. That is up from 20% and 10%, respectively, in 2018.

This shift means that more prime-quality, high-balance mortgages are being financed via non-agency shelves rather than held on bank balance sheets or placed in traditional jumbo programs, changing both the credit and prepayment profiles of non-QM pools.

In general, non-QM resecuritizations have increased following a pickup in deal calls since 2025. Year to date in 2026, about $4 billion of non-QM paper has been resecuritized, versus $5.5 billion of so-called collateral, the strategy team said.

Weakening performance?

Prepayment behavior in non-QM has shifted over time. S-curves have become steeper, a trend Bank of America attributes to the changing mix of high-FICO, high-balance and full-documentation loans in non-QM shelves, as well as differing concentrations of these loans across issuers. An increase in larger loans in recent deals has amplified that effect.

Delinquencies have continued to creep up in the 2022-2024 vintages across documentation types, the report said. The strategists point to cash-out refinances, weaker performance on bank statement underwriting, and multiple loans extended to single borrowers as primary drivers. By contrast, the 2025 vintage has performed better as lenders tightened credit boxes.

“Overall, cumulative losses in non-QM remain low at 3.6 basis points across vintages for the roughly $281 billion of cumulative originations and securitized since 2018,” the report explains. “A total of about 1,000 out of 580,000 loans have incurred cumulative loss greater than $10,000.”

This article was written by Flávia Furlan Nunes and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

California Regional MLS (CRMLS) is creating more options for home sellers looking to market and sell their properties. Earlier this month, CRMLS debuted a Limited Exposure Coming Soon listing option for home sellers and real estate professionals in California. 

In a post on the MLS’s Knowledgebase blog, it said the new option “can exclude listings from designated third-party sites at the client’s request without limiting the ability to share the listing on broker-controlled websites and/or social media platforms.” According to CRMLS, the default for coming soon listings is “Internet: Yes,” which means that these listings will be distributed for display on third-party sites via IDX feeds. 

CRMLS subscribers whose sellers choose the limited exposure coming soon option, are now able to set internet display on the coming soon listing to “No,” preventing the listing from being included in IDX feeds. Once a listing swaps from coming soon to active status, CRMLS said subscribers must manually swap the “Internet: No” to “Internet: Yes,” if the seller wants the listing displayed on the internet. However, the MLS said that if the seller instructs there to be no internet distribution of the listing, their agent must remove the listing from all social media platforms and any broker controlled websites. 

CRMLS first debuted its coming soon status for listings in May 2020. Listings are allowed to stay in a coming soon status for up to 21 days. The MLS did not start automatically syndicating coming soon listings via IDX feed until the end of March this year. 

“Our new form for limiting exposure of coming soon listings is a natural progression of giving sellers and their brokers greater choice in listing distribution,” Art Carter, the CEO of CRMLS, wrote in an emailed statement. “CRMLS’s coming soon policies have always been flexible over the years to address broker requests, AOR policies, and practices from neighboring MLSs to keep a fair and representative marketplace. This is just another step towards giving brokers flexibility while maintaining a transparent marketplace.”

The California-based MLS is not the only MLS that has explored the creation of more listing options for sellers. North Carolina-based Canopy MLS, as well as other MLSs across the country, have created a variety of listing options for consumers including Coming Soon/No-Show, limited-exposure and office-exclusive listings. 

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Reps. Sam Liccardo (D-Calif.) and William Timmons (R-S.C.) introduced bipartisan legislation on Tuesday to help local governments invest in disaster prevention rather than focusing solely on post-disaster recovery.

The “Ounce of Prevention Act” would expand eligible uses of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding to include pre-disaster mitigation projects, a shift supporters say would allow cities, counties and states to harden infrastructure and reduce risk before storms, wildfires or floods occur.

The bill also seeks to streamline federal rules that can slow approval of proactive resilience projects.

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” Liccardo said, adding that every $1 spent on mitigation can save roughly $13 in post-disaster costs. He said communities “should not have to wait for the storm, fire or flood to hit” before accessing federal support for resilience projects.

Timmons said the legislation gives local governments “commonsense flexibility” to use existing federal dollars more effectively, arguing that proactive investment is “better for taxpayers, better for communities and better for the people who call those communities home.”

Under current law, CDBG funds are generally reserved for community development and post-disaster recovery efforts, with Congress typically approving supplemental allocations after major disasters. Since 2020, lawmakers have appropriated about $22 billion in disaster recovery funding through the program.

The bill’s co-sponsors include Reps. Maria Salazar (R-Fla.) and Jill Tokuda (D-Hawaii).

The proposal has drawn support from a broad coalition of housing, insurance and local government groups, including the American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA), which said expanded mitigation funding could reduce long-term disaster losses and strengthen community resilience.

“Property casualty insurers are working to reduce losses and protect families and communities from the growing impact of hurricanes, wildfires, and other severe weather. APCIA supports this legislation because expanding federal investment in mitigation will help lower the economic toll of natural catastrophes and save lives,” said Sam Whitfield, APCIA senior vice president of federal government relations and political engagement.

The Council of State Community Development Agencies said the bill would give states and cities “needed flexibility” to address disaster risks before they occur, while the Local Initiatives Support Corp. said it would help direct resilience investments toward the most vulnerable communities.

County officials echoed that support. The National Association of Counties said the measure would help local leaders invest in preparedness rather than wait to rebuild after disasters strike.

Other industry trade groups, including the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies and the National Low Income Housing Coalition, said the bill could reduce losses, protect homeowners and improve resilience in low-income communities.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors said the legislation reflects the reality facing local leaders, who “don’t have the luxury of waiting until after a disaster” and must instead prioritize prevention and preparedness.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Brooklyn’s long-stalled Pacific Park megadevelopment inched closer to the finish line this week as developers unveiled a $5 billion plan to complete the project. Empire State Development, Cirrus Workforce Housing, and LCOR released a plan on Monday for the second phase of the project, formerly called Atlantic Yards, calling for seven new towers with 5,600 housing units, including roughly 1,242 affordable homes for low- and moderate-income households. The plan marks the start of the final chapter of the delayed megaproject, which saw its future thrown into doubt after a foreclosure and a change in developers last October.

Illustration of the proposed project. Credit: ESD

First proposed in 2003 as Atlantic Yards and initially led by developer Forest City Ratner, the 22-acre project originally called for a new arena for the former New Jersey Nets and 15 residential and office buildings, anchored by a glass supertall tower designed by Frank Gehry, as 6sqft previously reported.

The development included a platform planned above the MTA’s Atlantic Yards rail yard at the intersection of Pacific Street and Atlantic, Carlton, and Vanderbilt avenues. The state deemed the rail yard a “blight,” a major factor in its decision to acquire the sites through eminent domain and lease them to developers.

Lawsuits from residents and property owners displaced under the eminent domain agreement delayed construction for years. A planned modular tower that ran into obstacles further stalled the project, along with major crises such as the 2008 financial crash and the COVID-19 pandemic.

The expiration of the 421-a property tax abatement in 2022 also created another setback, with Greenland USA, an early stakeholder that took over more than 95 percent ownership of the project in 2018, saying that without it, it could not construct the affordable units.

A 2014 agreement with the city required Greenland to build 876 additional affordable units by 2025. The deal imposed a $2,000-per-month penalty for each unbuilt unit, which could total up to $21 million annually if deadlines were missed.

By December 2023, developers had completed nine of the 15 planned buildings and scrapped plans for the Gehry-designed tower. The Barclays Center, owned by Mikhail Prokhorov and home to the Brooklyn Nets, had already opened.

That month, Greenland USA defaulted on nearly $350 million in loans tied to the second phase, sending the project to a foreclosure auction and passing on the penalties and affordable housing requirements to the new developer.

Last October, Cirrus Real Estate and LCOR acquired the development rights to Pacific Park, contributing $12 million to an affordable housing fund to offset penalties that were not enforced against Greenland USA for failing to build the 876 affordable units.

Greenland is staying on as a partner, though in a much smaller capacity. The firm plans to monetize the B1 parcel, where a tower was previously planned, and Site 5 across Flatbush Avenue, as 6sqft previously reported. This would allow for a two-tower project at Site 5, which ESD has already approved, though it still requires public approval and a vote by the ESD board, according to the Atlantic Yards Report.

The new development team returned to ESD on Monday with a revised approach to finish Pacific Park, nine months later.

The proposal would be carried out by a design team that includes Kohn Pedersen Fox as master plan architect, Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates as master plan landscape architect, Of Place, leading placemaking and the public realm, and WSP spearheading structural work and serving as MEP engineer.

To build platforms over the railyards—one of the project’s most complex and costly components—the developers intend to use some of the foundations laid years ago. The state has also included $175 million in subsidies for the project in its budget, according to the New York Times.

A breakdown of the units in the new buildings in phase II. Credit: ESD

The plan calls for seven new buildings on six sites (including a two-tower building on site 5), with 4,600 rentals and 1,000 condos. Compared with the previous plan, the development will add 2,382 additional units to the original plan, for 8,812 total apartments.

The tallest tower would be 799 feet on site 5, currently home to a P.C. Richard store and former Modell’s. The remaining buildings range in height between 452 feet and 684 feet.

According to Monday’s presentation, there is strong demand for low- and moderate-income and family-sized rental units.

Phase two of the plan includes 1,242 income-restricted units for low- and moderate-income households, with over 30 percent designated as family-sized. That marks about 30 percent affordable apartments, compared to the 35 percent approved 20 years ago.

One of the first buildings to rise, just south of Flatbush Avenue between Atlantic Avenue and Pacific Street, would deliver 1,430 units.

Based on early estimates and this year’s affordability guidelines, the Times projects that about 50 units in the building would be affordable to families of four earning up to $67,840, and more than 150 apartments would be affordable to households of four earning up to $101,760.

The new proposal also addresses a strong desire for expanded open space. Compared with the currently approved plan, which features smaller, disconnected green spaces throughout the development, the revised plan envisions 8.5 acres of continuous open space designed for active recreation, seating, and gathering.

Illustration of B6 Park. Credit: ESD

The open space includes B8 Park, with a mix of active and passive programming, exceeding previously approved open space requirements.

Streetscape improvements would create safer intersections, enhance lighting, and widen sidewalks and crosswalks, with a strong emphasis on adding greenery and shade. Improved intersections and lighting would also provide better connectivity to the surrounding area.

Wind mitigation is also a key component of the public realm improvements. In the new plan, the base heights of buildings have been lowered, while base articulation has been increased, helping to mitigate stronger wind conditions created by sheer, straight building forms.

Illustration of B8 Park. Credit: ESD

The proposed master plan also prioritizes community space. Several community facilities are planned, including an intergenerational community center in B6, the first residential building to be delivered, a flexible hub in B10, and a potential revised “urban room” concept in B5.

While the revised plan is a step toward realizing the long-delayed megadevelopment, it has not been without criticism from some locals.

In March, a group of elected officials sent a letter to Gov. Kathy Hochul expressing concerns about the affordability of the apartments. BrooklynSpeaks, a coalition of civic groups, has also called for greater transparency and public input in the project, according to the Times.

During Monday’s meeting, Assemblywoman Jo Anne Simon, one of the letter’s signers, said the project’s affordability metrics and focus on moderate-income housing have failed to address the area’s need for low-income homes.

“We do know that the crying need for housing in this city is mostly at the lower end. It’s not as remunerative to build that, that’s why we keep being dug into this hole,” Simon said. “I think we need to have more conversations that are more interactive with the community. The people who went to those meetings were the people who live in the area, it’s already been gentrified.”

“We’ve already lost 25 percent of the African American population from those community boards,” she added. “It’s a snapshot. It’s not really an indicator of community and the people who are here and the need for housing.”

The project is estimated to cost $5 billion. New York will provide $700 million in public funding to build platforms over the railyard needed to build, as Gothamist and the Times reported.

Before work can begin, the plan must undergo an environmental review that state officials say could begin in September. Work could begin as early as 2028.

RELATED:

The post $5B plan unveiled to finish Brooklyn’s Pacific Park megadevelopment first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

Portside Real Estate Group has added Heather Szela to its central Maine office, where she will work with homebuyers and sellers throughout the region.

Szela, a Maine native, began her real estate career in the Boston area, with experience including residential sales and leasing.

She returned to Maine in 2017 and has continued working in residential real estate.

“I joined Portside because I wanted to be part of a company with a strong commitment to its communities and a culture that values giving back,” said Szela. “The collaborative environment and dedication to supporting local communities really align with my values, and I’m excited to be part of a team that shares that vision.”

A LeadingRE affiliate, Portside Real Estate Group reported $1.33 billion in 2025 volume across 2,090 transaction sides to RealTrends Verified.

“Heather’s dedication to serving her clients is matched by her commitment to serving her community,” said Dan McCarron, regional manager at Portside Real Estate Group. “She leads with integrity, builds meaningful relationships, and genuinely cares about helping people succeed. Those qualities embody what Portside is all about, and we’re thrilled to welcome her to our central Maine team.”

Szela said she values the opportunity to guide clients through major life decisions.

“I love that real estate gives me the opportunity to help people through an important milestone in their lives,” she said. “Every day is different, and I enjoy the problem-solving, creativity, and personal connections that come with the job.”

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Figure announced Tuesday that it has closed a $300 million fully prefunded securitization for loans that will trade on its blockchain-based marketplace, Figure Connect.

The company said the transaction departs from the traditional securitization process by securing funding from institutional investors before loans are originated rather than after they close.

According to Figure CEO Michael Tannenbaum, the approach provides originator partners with committed liquidity in advance, helping lock in pricing and execution while reducing uncertainty in their production pipelines.

“It’s all about the perspective of the originator,” Tannenbaum said in an interview with HousingWire. “Knowing that the loans are spoken for before you even fund them just gives you added certainty because, as you know, markets can change on a dime.”

Figure said the upfront fixed-rate capital establishes what it hopes will become a repeatable funding model for loans traded through Figure Connect.

The company compared its long-term vision to the liquidity provided by Fannie Mae and the agency mortgage-backed securities to-be-announced (TBA) market, which allows lenders to secure financing before loans are delivered.

“Having investors prefund and preaccept those loans before the loans are even funded, it’s just a function of the marketplace that adds value to the originator, and I think it also reflects the scale, consistency, and quality that Figure is operating in because we’re so mature in it from a capital market standpoint that people are so comfortable with what we’re doing that they’re willing to buy these loans before they even are originated,” Tannenbaum said.

Not a one-time thing

Tannenbaum called Figure “a version of Fannie Mae, but on modern blockchain rails,” and one that can support multiple asset classes rather than a narrow slice of mortgage products.

“I think that speaks to an opportunity for Figure to expand into a broader capital market offering and services for our customers as they’re looking to build their business on the back of not only the Fannie Mae ecosystem but also now the Figure ecosystem. People could, over time, start to use this to hedge as well,” he said.

From the investor side, Tannenbaum said the willingness to prefund stems from comfort with Figure’s “shelf,” meaning its brand, technology and track record in the capital markets.

“Investors want return on time; they want return on effort,” he said, noting that Figure is executing securitizations “almost every month” and is growing volumes by more than 100% at scale. “Investors want to buy repeatable and consistent assets, and Figure’s bringing those.”

The $300 million transaction is Figure’s first prefunded securitization, and Tannenbaum stressed it is not a one-off.

“This is a part of our strategy,” he said. “We are constantly investing to make sure that our originating partners have guaranteed liquidity and have consistent access to the capital markets. … This is big. No one’s ever done anything like this.”

Rather than a single forward buyer, Tannenbaum said that the capital comes from the “institutional bond market,” with a broad investor base purchasing AAA-rated bonds.

“The whole value of a securitization is that you’re transforming loans that are relatively chunky and sort of sitting around into a security that’s liquid, has a CUSIP and can be bought by anybody who buys bonds of that nature,” he said. “It’s a much more liquid approach.”

For lenders, the structure is less about richer economics and more about liquidity and certainty, including a fixed execution price. But borrowers could ultimately see downstream benefits as well, he added, as stronger liquidity and capital markets efficiency translate into lower system costs and, over time, better rates.

Tannenbaum also highlighted Figure’s scale, noting that Figure Connect originated $1.4 billion in May, with the $300 million prefunded deal representing a meaningful slice of that volume. The company recently announced its intent to acquire Kiavi in a $717 million deal, with plans to integrate its RTL platform and DSCR rental loans into Figure Connect and Democratized Prime.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Nearly a year after Rocket Companies closed its acquisition of Redfin in an all-stock transaction valued at $1.75 billion in equity, Joe Rath, the former Redfin senior director of operations and current head of industry relations at Rocket, says that things “could not have gone better” with the integration of the two firms. 

“We have our swagger back. It feels so good to be building things again,” Rath said. “At Redfin, it wasn’t for lack of want, it was more for lack of resources, but we stopped innovating at some point, and I think that is the biggest difference between a year ago and now, is that we are part of this larger homeownership platform and building and innovating again.” 

Back to building

One of the things Rath is most excited about is how Redfin, with the support of Rocket, has been able to play with the idea of what it means for a home to come to market. 

“We have been able to think about the existing structure of how homes come to market today, where being on the market has almost become synonymous with being on the MLS, and we just view things differently. There are these would-be sellers on the sidelines,” he said. “We surveyed them and found that three-quarters of prospective sellers would move today if friction disappeared, and 58% say moving feels riskier than staying put. So, there’s this market that exists on the sidelines, and we’re fascinated by that group and how we can help them come onto a platform to actually test that market out.” 

This, he said, is what led to Rocket’s partnership with Compass International Holdings to display the firm’s coming soon listings on Redfin, as well as the launch of Redfin Early Access. 

The flywheel in full effect

While Rath has enjoyed innovating around these products and partnerships, he said he has also enjoyed exploring the flywheel effect Redfin is now part of as a portion of a company that includes everything from home search to mortgage origination and mortgage servicing. 

“The housing transaction was split across a dozen separate industries, so what buyers and sellers think of and call ‘moving’, we call it a lot of different things and costs begin to multiply through all of these handoffs and the consumers were basically stuck,” Rath said. 

This is why Rath believes more and more firms are creating “vertical stacks,” because they are enabling companies to solve these challenges in ways the “horizontal” companies never could.

“We had all of these horizontal layers and companies. That was failing consumers, and I think that is why the consumers and the dollars are flocking to this idea of an ecosystem. We have this infrastructure with portals, MLSs and associations that were all building toll roads and not highways, and I think over time that friction has been slower to be removed than in other industries, but if we work together we can help solve this.” 

Over the next decade, Rath said he feels the companies that will be rewarded will be those that remove steps and costs for consumers. 

More opportunities for agents

In addition to creating a smoother and more cost-effective transaction for consumers, Rath also said this vertical business model also offers benefits for real estate professionals. 

“If it’s a consumer we transacted with in the past and we service their loan, we have a data advantage that allows us to see their behavior maybe 12 to 15 years later when that homeowner goes onto Redfin and begins looking for a home,” he said. “Our agents can see that behavior in real time and then reach out and see if they can help them.”

As an industry and as a company, Rath believes real estate professionals could do a much better job of becoming part of a homeowner’s or family’s conversation around moving much earlier on in the process, opening up the conversation about what a possible move would look like. 

Looking ahead, Rath said he wants to continue building and innovating at Redfin and for the company to continue telling its story to the public in ways they were previously unable to.

“This was the first year we saw a Super Bowl commercial featuring Redfin, and we sponsored the Cleveland Cavaliers playoff run in the Eastern Conference Finals. To see Redfin plastered all over Rocket Arena was a surreal experience for me,” Rath said. “Like I said, we have our swagger back, and I want to see more of that over the next year.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

Dovenmuehle Mortgage Inc. has appointed Ann Morey as its head of product, the mortgage subservicer announced Tuesday.

Morey will oversee the company’s product management strategy, including setting product vision, developing product road maps, improving cross-functional collaboration and leading product teams.

She joins Dovenmuehle with more than 15 years of experience leading digital product and technology teams across the financial services, logistics and government sectors.

Most recently, Morey served as vice president of product delivery at Tria, formerly known as Softrams, where she managed a team of more than 200 employees and oversaw three enterprise software contracts with annual revenue totaling about $70 million. She previously held product leadership roles with the U.S. Air Force‘s Kessel Run software development unit, XPO Logistics and First Data.

“Ann brings exactly the kind of product leadership we need as we continue to evolve our platform and capabilities,” senior vice president Matt Budy said in a statement. “Her track record of cultivating high-performing teams, driving measurable outcomes and translating complex client needs into effective technology solutions makes her exceptionally well-suited to lead this function at Dovenmuehle.”

According to the company, Morey has implemented product development and prioritization frameworks throughout her career and has focused on talent development, including launching mentorship programs and reducing employee turnover at a previous employer.

“I’ve spent my career at the intersection of complex operations and digital products, and Dovenmuehle sits squarely in that space,” Morey said in a statement. “The company has built an impressive legacy, and I’m looking forward to building on that foundation with modern product practices alongside a team focused on continuous improvement and client value.”

According to data from Inside Mortgage Finance, Dovenmuehle represents 7.3% of the residential subservicer market. The company ranked fifth among the top 25 subservicers on IMF’s list with a value of $310 billion in first-quarter 2026, but its portfolio declined 1.3% from the previous quarter and 6.3% from a year earlier.

This article was written by Sarah Wolak and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation, then reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

In housing, there are a few words that get tossed around so often they start to lose all meaning.

“Affordability” is one of them. “Sustainability” is another. Near the top of the list is “density.”

Say the word at a city council meeting, and half the room hears “traffic,” “apartments,” “school overcrowding,” and “there goes the neighborhood.” Say it at a development meeting, and someone inevitably points to a zoning chart as if a spreadsheet could tell you whether a neighborhood will actually be worth living in.

That is where much of the affordability conversation goes off the rails.

A spreadsheet is not a neighborhood. A zoning chart is not a community. And a higher unit count does not automatically make a place better, more affordable or more livable.

The better question is not simply how many homes can fit on a piece of land. Rather, it is about how people should live on that land. That is where design matters. If a city’s zoning allows 3.5 units per acre and a developer proposes a plan at two units per acre, the immediate reaction should not be that the site is underbuilt. That is zoning-table thinking.

It is also how good plans get killed before anyone understands them. What local stakeholders should ask is, “Does the trade deliver?”  If the lower-density plan creates more parks, more trails, more preserved trees, better drainage, better gathering places and a neighborhood people will still value in 20 years, that may be the smarter, more affordable outcome.

That sounds counterintuitive only if affordability is treated as a simple math problem based entirely on units per acre. It is not.

Affordability is land cost. Affordability is an infrastructure cost. Affordability is entitlement risk. Affordability is time. Affordability is product size. Affordability is lot configuration. Affordability is how much street, pipe, curb, drainage and concrete it takes to deliver each home. Affordability is whether the political process takes six months or three years. Affordability is whether the neighborhood accepts a plan or fights it until the project dies.

Importantly, affordability is whether families actually want to live there when it is built.

In Texas, affordability is not just the price of the steak. It is the whole tab – to mix the metaphors, it is the land, the kitchen, the waiter, the lease, the electric bill, the parking lot, the property tax, and the guy at the next table explaining why he could have done it better.

The real mistake localities make

Cities often say they do not like density. That is not quite right. What many cities actually dislike is the appearance of density at the lot level. Smaller lots look dense. Tight setbacks look dense. More homes visible from the street look dense. So the instinctive answer becomes: less. Less intensity. Less small-lot product. Less change.

But when a city focuses on lot size rather than acreage density, it can end up rejecting the better plan for the wrong reason. That is the blind spot.

Too often, the review begins and ends with a single line on the zoning table: minimum lot size. If the lot is smaller than the number on the page, the reflexive answer is no. It does not matter what the gross density is. It does not matter how much open space is preserved. It does not matter whether the plan uses less infrastructure per home or creates a stronger public realm.

The conversation stops because the lot is “too small.” That makes no sense if the real goal is affordability, livability, and long-term fiscal health. A 7,500-square-foot lot backing up to a fence can be approved with little debate, even if it requires more street, more pipe, and more long-term maintenance per home.

A 3,000- to 4,000-square-foot lot fronting a park or green can be rejected on sight, even if it supports a lower price point, less infrastructure per unit and a better neighborhood experience.

On paper, the bigger lot looks safer.

On the ground, a smaller lot within a better plan can be more attainable for the buyer, more efficient for the builder, and more valuable to the city over time. In other words, many cities do not really hate density. They hate the optics of a smaller yard.

They are looking at the wrong side of the fraction. If a city first looked at acreage density, infrastructure per home, usable open space and long-term value per acre, many “too dense” objections would fall apart faster than a cheap lawn chair in an August Texas sun.

What better math looks like

This is not just a homebuilding issue. It is a land-use issue. Groups such as Strong Towns and Urban3 have spent years making a similar point in a different context: cities should focus on value per acre, not just total value. Compact, traditional development patterns often generate far more taxable value per acre than large-format, spread-out patterns dominated by surface parking and excessive land consumption.

The lesson is straightforward: larger footprints and greater land consumption do not automatically translate into more fiscal value for a city. The same principle applies within a subdivision.

A small lot fronting a park can feel larger than a larger lot backing up to an eight-foot fence. A cottage home on a green can feel more valuable than a larger home buried in a repetitive street grid. A compact home next to trails, water, trees, and shared open space can offer a better life than a larger home with no neighborhood nearby.

That is not theory. That is design, and it is also math.

A conventional subdivision layout often features long local streets, deep driveways, larger lots, oversized cul-de-sacs, and leftover open space across the site. That means more curb, more inlets, more pavement, more water line, more storm pipe, more grading and more long-term maintenance.

A more thoughtful plan featuring smaller lots, shorter streets, connected open space and improved block structure can reduce that burden while delivering a stronger public realm.

Less linear street per home. Less pipe per home. Less wasted land. More usable open space. More walkability. More identity. That is a much better affordability equation than simply arguing over whether a lot is 30 feet or 75 feet wide.

Density is not the same as livability

This is where the housing conversation often goes wrong. People talk about density as though it were the same as design quality. 

It is not. A badly designed plan at 3.5 units per acre is still badly designed. A thoughtful plan at 2 units per acre can create a far better neighborhood if it uses the land strategically. Smaller lots around parks. Trail systems that connect the entire community. Preserved natural features instead of unnecessary clearing. Open space used for drainage, recreation, beauty and identity all at once.

Not every family needs a giant backyard. Every family benefits from a nearby park. Not every child needs a private soccer field behind the house. Every child benefits from a trail, a lawn, a playground, a shaded walk, a fishing pond and a place to ride a bike. Not every home needs to sit on the largest possible piece of dirt. Every home benefits from being part of a place that was actually designed.

That is the part too many review processes overlook. They see a smaller lot and assume it means lower quality. They see open space and assume it is a luxury. They see a lower gross density number and assume the plan is less efficient. In reality, the opposite may be true.

Texas understands land better than most places.

We know the difference between land that is useful and land that is just sitting there wearing a big hat. Open space should not be decoration. It should work. It should drain. It should connect. It should create value. It should improve the homes around it. That is how green space becomes infrastructure for affordability.

What cities should measure instead

If cities are serious about housing affordability, they need to upgrade their metrics. Minimum lot size is a blunt tool. It may be easy to administer, but it does not tell a city whether a plan is affordable, fiscally productive, or livable over the long term. A better approval framework would start with a different set of questions.

What is the plan’s gross density, not just the minimum lot size? How much infrastructure per home is being built, including streets, curbs, drainage, and piping? What percentage of homes are within a short walk of a real park, trail, or usable open space? How much of the open space is central, visible, and functional rather than hidden in leftover corners? What long-term maintenance burden will the city inherit per acre? What value per acre will the neighborhood create over time?

Those are the questions that link design to affordability. They also connect today’s approval decision to tomorrow’s municipal balance sheet. Greater distance and more pavement usually mean higher costs. More pipe, more curb, more detention, more road, and more dead-end streets are not free. 

Someone pays for them. At first, the builder pays. Then the buyer pays. Eventually, the city pays. That is why land planning matters so much. Cities do not just inherit rooftops. They inherit streets, drainage systems, traffic patterns, maintenance obligations and complaints. They inherit the neighborhood forever.

Improve the conversation for builders and cities

Builders already understand that every unnecessary foot of street, every oversized lot, every inefficient layout, every entitlement delay, and every political fight gets baked into the final home price. The buyer pays for it all. Cities should understand that the same costs are also baked into long-term public obligations.

That is why a blanket “no small lots” rule is not a safeguard against bad development. It often blocks some of the most thoughtful and attainable neighborhood plans. It treats lot size as a proxy for quality, even though quality is really a function of design, land planning, infrastructure efficiency, and what the city will own and maintain over time. The opportunity is not to choose between affordability and livability. The opportunity is to combine the two.

Smaller lots. Better parks. More trails. Less wasted land. More thoughtful infrastructure. More beauty. More attainability. That is where housing needs to go. The future of affordability is not just more rooftops. It is a better neighborhood. And better neighborhoods require more than zoning math. They require design.

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

With mortgage rates on an upward trend in recent months, housing professionals got a welcome respite this week as the costs of a home loan declined.

On Tuesday, HousingWire‘s Mortgage Rates Center showed that 30-year conventional loan rates averaged 6.73% — down 6 basis points from one week ago. Rates for 30-year jumbo loans dropped to 6.66% — down 15 bps — while rates for 30-year loans through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) were down 9 bps to 6.29%.

At the midpoint of the year, housing demand remains resilient despite ongoing affordability constraints, including mortgage rates near 6.7%.

HousingWire Lead Analyst Logan Mohtashami wrote this week that purchase loan applications — which tend to lead closed home sales by 30 to 90 days — are up from last year’s levels. But the weekly application numbers have bounced around through the first half of 2026, with 12 negative prints, 10 positive prints and two neutral prints.

“This year’s growth is a bit more legit than last year’s, which was working from an extremely low base, so the percentage growth needs context,” Mohtashami wrote in this week’s Housing Market Tracker. “The Iran conflict didn’t damage this data line too much on the negative side; a better premise is that the growth rate was probably slowed just a tad.”

Higher rates, muted refis

Bob Broeksmit, president and CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) said mortgage market participants are still digesting the policy decisions and comments of the Federal Reserve under new Chair Kevin Warsh. Last week’s mortgage application data from the MBA saw 1% growth from the prior week, adjusted for the Juneteenth holiday, led by a 3% rise in refinance applicants. Refi and purchase loan demand is 17% and 3% higher, respectively, than year-ago levels.

“While mortgage application activity was mixed, overall demand continues to outpace last year’s levels, reflecting the underlying strength of the housing market. As economic conditions continue to evolve, greater certainty around the interest rate outlook should help foster increased borrower confidence and support sustained housing market activity,” Broeksmit said in a statement.

The Fed held benchmark rates steady two weeks ago — the central bank’s fourth straight rate pause — but indications point to monetary policymakers being more likely to raise rates in 2026 than lower them.

Quarterly projections released by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) at their prior meeting showed that nine of 12 voting members anticipate a rate hike by the end of the year. The federal funds rate, currently pegged at 3.5% to 3.75%, is expected to rise to 3.8% in six months, up from an estimate of 3.4% in March.

The refi wave that briefly materialized earlier this year when rates dropped below 6% has already crested, according to an analysis released last week by Cotality. The report explained that as of April, 3.7% of outstanding mortgages have rates above 7%, while another 10.5% of loans have rates above 6.5%. This is limiting the incentives for most potential refi candidates.

“But the opportunity is concentrated in recent vintages, with post-2022 borrowers carrying much higher rates and poised to refinance first if rates move even modestly lower,” Cotality said.

‘Masking a widening divide’

Home-price appreciation has generally been a tailwind for the housing market in 2026. Annual growth across much of the country has floated near 1%, well below the double-digit growth of the COVID-19 pandemic that was viewed as unsustainable. On Tuesday, the S&P Cotality Case-Shiller Index for April posted yearly growth of 0.8%, up slightly from the 0.7% figure in March as inflation accelerated to 3.8% in April.

But HousingWire Data, which reflects more current market conditions, reveals softer home-price appreciation for the week ending June. 26. The median list price of $450,000 was down 3.2% year over year and flat over the prior month. Some major metros were bucking the trend, led by Chicago at 7.3% annual growth, Atlanta (+3.2%) and Miami (+3.1%).

“National house prices are making history in slow motion,” Mark Fleming, chief economist at First American, said in commentary released this week. “While annual house price growth remains below 1 percent, the price level reached a new historical peak this month. Unlike the pandemic-era housing boom, when double-digit appreciation quickly pushed prices higher, today’s record reflects the cumulative effect of small monthly gains rather than rapid price acceleration.

“Although inventory continues to increase compared with a year ago, the pace of inventory growth nationally has moderated, and supply remains below pre-pandemic norms, limiting both upward and downward pressure on prices.”

Cotality’s analysis also found muted home-price growth of 0.3% for the year ending in March. But it concluded that the “national housing market is masking a widening divide” as there is sharp movement at the local level.

Home prices in San Francisco were up 8.1% from January to April, Cotality said, followed by Newark, New Jersey (+6.4%); Boston (+5.9%) and Rochester, New York (+4.3%). At the other end of the spectrum, prices declined in other markets during the four-month period, led by Cape Coral, Florida (-4.7%); New York City (-2.3%); Buffalo, New York (-2.1%); and Washington, D.C. (-1.3%).

“Home price appreciation is pushing more homeowners above long-standing capital gains tax exclusion thresholds, increasing the share of sellers who owe taxes when they move,” Cotality said. “Those thresholds, $250,000 for single filers and $500,000 for married couples, have remained unchanged since the late 1990s, despite significant gains in home values.

“Cotality analysis shows roughly one in 12 sellers now exceed these limits, with the burden most pronounced in high-cost markets like California. As a result, more owners are staying put, limiting resale supply even as prices remain elevated.”

This post was originally published on here. 

On:

On July 4, America celebrates its 250th anniversary, a momentous occasion marked by patriotic celebrations across the country. New York City festivities will be especially memorable this year. The Macy’s 4th of July fireworks show is set to be its biggest ever, with fireworks launching from three separate locations for the first time. The largest parade of tall ships ever assembled takes to the New York Harbor, with more than 40 tall ships from around the world and 30 naval vessels. Ahead, find some of the best 4th of July celebrations for America’s semiquincentennial, from ship tours and exhibits exploring NYC’s Revolutionary past and immigrant history to firework watch parties on rooftops and observation decks.

Major events

Sail4th 250
New York Harbor, July 3 through July 8

Credit: OpSail 2000

This July, the largest fleet of tall ships ever to sail into New York Harbor will arrive as part of celebrations marking America’s 250th anniversary. The once-in-a-generation “Sail4th 250” event will bring six days of festivities to the five boroughs from July 3 through July 8, capped by the arrival of 40 tall ships and 32 warships from around the world on July 4.

Among the featured vessels is Cunard’s Queen Mary 2, the world’s only ocean liner, which will dock in the harbor and serve as a viewing point for the fleet’s parade. The British Navy will also send two aircraft carriers, while U.S. Navy and Coast Guard ships will anchor along the Hudson River between the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge and the George Washington Bridge.

The celebration is anticipated to draw between eight and ten million spectators, who will line the 15-mile shorelines of New York and New Jersey to witness the historical arrival. The event is projected to generate about $2.85 billion in economic impact.

After docking, 30 international vessels will be open to the public for free throughout the week-long stay. Tour locations include Brooklyn Bridge Park, Sail City, South Street Seaport, and Stapleton Park on Staten Island. Book a tour here. For tall ships at Pier 86, book a tour through the Intrepid Museum.

The International Naval Review 250 will coincide with the arrival, marking the seventh such review hosted by the United States and the fourth in NYC. Naval forces, maritime services, and coast guards from more than 130 nations have been invited to participate.

Times Square Ball Drop
Times Square, July 3

Photo courtesy of America250

The Times Square Ball Drop, a classic NYC tradition, will light up Midtown this July 4th for the first time ever, dropping not once but eight times to ring in Independence Day across all American time zones. Marking the first time the ball has dropped multiple times in a single year, the patriotic celebration begins at 10 a.m. with the first drop honoring Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, followed by a series of special moments and live performances across Puerto Rico and the continental United States, building up to the New York City countdown at 11:59 p.m.

Rooftop parties & observation decks

Credit: spurekar on Flickr

As patriotic festivities ramp up across the five boroughs around Independence Day, so too will its most cherished tradition: the Macy’s 4th of July Fireworks show. This year marks a double milestone—it is the nation’s 250th birthday and the 50th anniversary of the fireworks spectacle itself. To celebrate the occasion, the show will launch from three separate locations, marking the largest display in its history. A dazzling array of fireworks will launch simultaneously from the Brooklyn Bridge, the lower East River near the South Street Seaport, and the lower Hudson River in a collaboration with Jersey City. Expect more than 85,000 shells in 30 colors, a laser show, and a star-studded broadcast.

With multiple launch sites this year, there will be even more opportunities to view the fireworks. Here is a list of some of the best places to enjoy the show:

Empire State Building
20 West 34th Street, Midtown

The world’s most famous skyscraper is hosting an unforgettable fireworks viewing party, promising an unparalleled vantage point to observe the night sky blazing with vibrant colors and explosions. Guests can enjoy classic summer barbecue fare like hot dogs, brisket sliders, fried chicken, and more, as well as unlimited beer, wine, and non-alcoholic beverages. While tickets to the tower’s 102nd-floor observation deck are sold out, there are still limited tickets available for its 86th-floor observation deck. Tickets start at $580 and can be purchased here.

Summit One Vanderbilt
45 East 42nd Street, Midtown

4th of July 2025 at Summit. Photo courtesy of Summit One Vanderbilt.

Witness the largest Macy’s 4th of July fireworks spectacle in city history from one of NYC’s most breathtaking vantage points. At 1,100 feet above the city, Summit One Vanderbilt offers guests access to all three floors of the observation deck, two drinks, one food item of their choice, complimentary cotton candy, live music, games, 3D fireworks glasses, and more. Tickets are $160 for guests under 21 and $250 for those 21 and older. You can purchase tickets here.

Top of the Rock
45 Rockefeller Plaza, Midtown

Experience the city’s largest fireworks show in its history at Top of the Rock. Seventy stories above Manhattan, guests can indulge in festive food and drinks while dancing to a live DJ. The family-friendly event also features a range of children’s activities, including face painting, coloring books, glow sticks, and more. Tickets start at $95 for children and $250 for adults.

Golden Child
444 Park Avenue South, Nomad

Enjoy the 4th high above the city atop Hotel Park Ave NYC at its new rooftop, Golden Child. Designed as a social club without the membership fees, the Ivy League-inspired destination is offering a two-hour premium open bar from 6 to 8 p.m. and food specials throughout the evening, along with views of the Manhattan skyline and fireworks. Reservations are available here.

ART Midtown
351 West 38th Street, Midtown

Credit: ART Midtown

Celebrate in true patriotic style at ART Midtown’s rooftop Independence Day extravaganza. Taking place from 4 to 11 p.m. on the 26th floor of Arlo Midtown, the rooftop vantage point provides stunning views of Hudson Yards, One World Trade Center, and the Manhattan skyline. Admission includes a barbecue buffet and a premium open bar from 7 to 9 p.m. General admission tickets are priced at $125.

Formino
Brooklyn Bridge Park, Pier 6, Bridge Park Drive

Take a front-row seat to Macy’s 4th of July fireworks show at Brooklyn Bridge Park’s Formino, situated atop Pier 6. Guests will enjoy spectacular views of New York Harbor, the Brooklyn Bridge, the Manhattan skyline, and the fireworks display. Tickets cost $250 and include rooftop access, a chef-curated 4th of July menu, and an open bar.

One40 Rooftop
140 Washington Street, Financial District

Raise a glass to the 4th high above the Financial District at One40 Rooftop. From 8 to 11 p.m., guests can enjoy premium cocktails and elevated bites while taking in sweeping views of the Manhattan and Jersey City skylines. General admission tickets cost $225 per person, plus tax. For those looking to celebrate in style, VIP Lounge tickets are available for $2,000, plus tax, and include a reserved lounge for up to five guests, premium fireworks viewing, a dedicated cocktail server, a bottle of champagne, hors d’oeuvres, and an open bar. Tickets can be purchased here.

The View at Lokal
2 2nd Street, Jersey City

Credit: Lokal Jersey City

Celebrate Independence Day on the Jersey City waterfront at The View at Lokal, which offers unobstructed views of the Manhattan skyline across New York Harbor. Guests can enjoy the most bombastic Macy’s 4th of July fireworks show in history from an unparalleled waterfront vantage point from 7 to 11 p.m. General admission tickets start at $195 per person, with early bird pricing available for $150 per person before 7 p.m.

Edge at Hudson Yards
30 Hudson Yards, Hudson Yards
July 4th from 7:30 p.m. to 3:00 a.m.

Photo by Roy Rochlin/Getty Images for Edge at Hudson Yards

Edge, the highest outdoor sky deck in the Western Hemisphere, is hosting a 4th of July celebration with views of the Macy’s fireworks and a late-night show continuing the festivities into the early morning. At 1,100 feet above Manhattan, guests will take in panoramic skyline and fireworks views, along with a live DJ, food and drinks, and more. Afterward, visitors can continue the celebration at a late-night event on the Marquee Skydeck, running from 11 p.m. to 3 a.m. The event is for guests 21 and over. Tickets start at $230 for the 7 p.m. entry and $85 for the late-night Marquee Skydeck show.

Manhatta
28 Liberty Street, Financial District

Photo by Roman Halpern

Another sky-high Independence Day celebration returns to the Financial District restaurant, Manhatta. This year’s event features an all-night open bar, live music, lawn and arcade games, and an expansive barbecue spread inspired by American classics, including pulled pork and hot dogs. Tickets cost $250 per person and can be reserved here.

Other events

Circle Line’s 4th of July Cruises
July 3 through July 8

Credit: Circle Line

Circle Line is offering a lineup of ways to experience the city’s Independence Day celebrations from the water, including a front-row seat cruising among tall ships as part of Sail4th 250, as well as sightseeing cruises around Manhattan’s waterways. On July 3, you can cruise among the tall ships as they arrive ahead of the parade. On July 4, another cruise option anchors near the Statue of Liberty, placing you right in the middle of the action during the actual parade. Cruises will continue after the parade, offering sightseeing tours through July 8. Learn more about cruise options and ticket prices here.

New York Yankees Game
Yankee Stadium, 1 East 161st Street, The Bronx
July 4 at 1:35 p.m.

What better way to spend the 4th than watching America’s pastime? The New York Yankees are facing off against the Minnesota Twins in the Bronx this Independence Day, with the first 18,000 guests receiving a special-edition 4th of July Yankees cap. Tickets are available for purchase here. There will also be a fireworks show following the team’s evening game on Friday, July 3.

The South Street Seaport Museum
Pier 16, South Street Seaport

Credit: South Street Seaport Museum

A memorable 4th of July fireworks viewing experience awaits at the South Street Seaport Museum, whose East River vantage point offers an up-close view of the spectacle. The museum is offering a variety of ticketed experiences, beginning with an elevated celebration aboard the Pioneer for $999 per person. The vessel will participate in the Sail4th 250 ship parade and offer direct views of the fireworks overhead.

A larger viewing event at Pier 16 offers three zones. Admission for the Red Zone is $700, the White Zone is $225, and the Blue Zone is $125. The Red Zone is the most exclusive viewing area, providing optimal views of fireworks launched from the Brooklyn Bridge and barges on the East River. The White Zone offers strong views of barge-launched fireworks but more limited sightlines of the bridge, while the Blue Zone offers views of fireworks from the barges only. Learn more about ticket options here.

Movies With A View at Brooklyn Bridge Park
Brooklyn Bridge Park, Pier 1 Harbor Lawn
Thursday evening in July and August

Credit: John Eng

Brooklyn Bridge Park has unveiled the lineup for its annual outdoor film series, Movies With A View, which will kick off July 4th weekend with a July 2 screening of Lin-Manuel Miranda’s “Hamilton” to kick off July 4th weekend. The popular summer series draws crowds to Pier 1 for films under the night sky, with sunset views of New York Harbor and Lower Manhattan as a scenic backdrop. Each evening, the lawn opens at 6 p.m., and films begin at sunset. Learn more about the July 2nd screening here.

Exploring American history in NYC

Independence Day at the New York Public Library
Stephen A. Schwarzman Building, 476 5th Avenue, Midtown

Credit: Jonathan Blanc/The New York Public Library

The New York Public Library is celebrating the nation’s semiquincentennial systemwide, with a display of its rare copy of the Declaration of Independence, an exhibition highlighting New York’s role in the American Revolution, and additional educational programming. From July 1 to July 3 at the Stephen A. Schwarzman Building, visitors can view one of the few surviving “fair copies” of the historic document handwritten by Thomas Jefferson. Tickets for the public viewings are sold out, though a limited number of walk-ins will be accepted.

While at the Stephen A. Schwarzman Building, visitors can also see the NYPL’s free exhibition “Declaring America: 1776 & Beyond,” which explores the complex and powerful stories of the American Revolution from 1776 to the present day. Focusing on NYC’s unique role as both a literal and symbolic battleground in the opening stages of the conflict, the exhibition traces the enduring role of protest throughout American history, showcasing historic documents and artifacts from the library’s collections. It is on view through January 10, 2027.

The New York Historical
170 Central Park West, Upper West Side

Credit: © Bridgit Beyer

New York’s oldest museum has a lot in store this 4th of July, just weeks after the opening of its new $175 million Tang Wing for American Democracy. Designed by Robert A.M. Stern Architects, the wing marks the first expansion of the landmarked campus in nearly a century. The museum, founded in 1804 when the United States was still an emerging nation, said the new space will expand room for exhibitions, programming, and democracy-focused education.

The new gallery spaces are hosting a variety of special exhibitions for the nation’s semiquincentennial. “House Made of Dawn,” on view through August 16, showcases artistic expression and modernist practices by artists of Indigenous Heritage.

“Old Masters, New Amsterdam,” on view through August 30, uses paintings by Rembrandt and his peers to imagine life in the Dutch settlement before it became the city we know today. On view through October 25, “Revolutionary Women” explores how the American Revolution impacted New York’s women and highlights the ways they played an active role in the event.

“Democracy Matters,” on view through November 1, examines art and historical objects from the Historical’s collection to explore how the concept of democracy has evolved through key moments in the nation’s history.

Fraunces Tavern Museum
54 Pearl Street, Financial District

Credit: Carl Mikoy on Flickr

Two hundred and fifty years after serving as a meeting place for the Sons of Liberty, the setting for George Washington’s farewell address to his officers, and even being struck by a cannonball during battle, the Financial District’s Fraunces Tavern is hosting a special exhibition examining the American Revolution from 1775 to 1783, with a focus on what happened in New York and the surrounding areas.

“Path to Liberty: The Emergence of a Nation,” which opened in April, is a chronological, multi-year exhibition exploring historic events that took place at the tavern and throughout New York during the American Revolution. It features personal letters, artifacts, and artwork from the museum’s permanent collection to tell the stories of influential figures and major battles of the conflict.

The South Street Seaport Museum
213 Water Street, South Street Seaport

Credit: Richard Bowditch

“The Promise of Liberty: Words That Shaped a Nation” exhibition at the Seaport Museum traces the evolution of the nation’s founding ideas through rare documents and pivotal moments in history. Spanning a full floor in the historic 1868 A.A. Thomson & Co. building, the gallery features rarely seen documents and ephemera, such as handwritten pages from an undelivered inaugural address by George Washington and an advance copy of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “March on Washington” speech. Visitors can explore key milestones that pushed the nation closer to equality, including the fight for religious freedom, the abolition of slavery, and women’s suffrage. The exhibition is open Wednesdays through Sundays from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Tickets are available for purchase here.

Museum of the City of New York
1220 Fifth Avenue, East Harlem

The entire third floor of East Harlem’s Museum of the City of New York is currently hosting a special exhibition offering an immersive exploration of the city’s pivotal role during the Revolutionary War. Presented in collaboration with the Gotham Center for New York City History at the CUNY Graduate Center, the 7,000-square-foot exhibition explores New York from the era of imperial crisis in 1763 to its emergence as the nation’s first capital in 1790 and beyond. “The Occupied City: New York and the American Revolution” shows how the city’s diverse population—revolutionaries and loyalists, enslaved and free Black New Yorkers, and Indigenous peoples—shaped the events that gave rise to the nation. Tickets are available online.

“We The City”
Locations across the city
Starting July 1, the city will launch a public art installation projecting historic images and stories of immigrant New Yorkers onto sites across the five boroughs. Presented in partnership with the City Council, the New York Historical, and the New York Immigrant Coalition, “We The City” seeks to honor the lives and contributions of immigrants who, for generations, have defined NYC’s cultural, economic, and civic landscape. The digital projections will appear on institutions such as the Museum of Modern Art, the Staten Island Museum, and the Bronx Children’s Museum, as well as on infrastructure including LinkNYC kiosks and locations across all three public library systems.

RELATED:

The post How to celebrate America’s 250th birthday in NYC first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here. 

On:

A proposed four-building development in Downtown Brooklyn with roughly 1,500 apartments is set to enter public review next month. The Department of City Planning (DCP) on Friday issued a 30-day certification notice for 240 Nassau Street, a mixed-use development near the Brooklyn Navy Yard with 1,500 homes, a new K–8 public school, a community center, a cultural center, retail space, and public open space. The development team, consisting of NYC Educational Construction Fund (ECF), Alloy Development, and GFB Development, is looking to rezone the site to allow for the 1.4 million-square-foot mixed-use development. The uniform land use review procedure (ULURP) will begin in July, with construction anticipated to start in 2027.

Aerial southeast view of 240 Nassau Street

Alloy previously worked with ECF on its five-building Alloy Block project in Downtown Brooklyn, which delivered two new Passive House public schools and more than 1,000 homes, including the city’s first all-electric skyscraper and the world’s tallest Passive House building.

The site currently hosts the Madison Square Boys & Girls Club’s Navy Yard Clubhouse, which Alloy purchased in 2023 after it abruptly closed following the organization’s bankruptcy.

Aerial rendering of 240 Nassau Street

Since acquiring the site, Alloy has led a three-year community engagement process, gathering feedback from more than 1,000 local stakeholders. This included more than 150 meetings with community organizations, nearby NYCHA tenant associations, elected officials, and other neighbors to help shape the project.

The firm later partnered with the club to temporarily restore after-school programming at the community hub, while donating $2 million to support the effort. Alloy has also provided free space to six local community groups offering programming for local youth at 240 Nassau Avenue, according to Yimby.

“As 240 Nassau advances toward public review next month, we’re proud to move this community-driven project forward that reflects more than three years of collaboration with well over 1,000 neighbors, elected officials and local stakeholders,” Alloy CEO Jared Della Valle said.

“The plan for this site includes high quality affordable and senior housing, a new public school, state-of-the-art community facility and cultural centers, and almost an acre of new outdoor space–all shaped by the neighborhood’s needs and priorities.”

The club will receive a new 22,500-square-foot, state-of-the-art community center replacing the existing facility. The space will be operated by a to-be-determined provider selected based on local resident feedback, and will include a large recreation area, a covered outdoor space, classrooms, a dance studio, a kitchen, and a music room.

Roughly 1,500 homes will be distributed across three buildings, including 300 affordable units. Of the total affordable units, 100 will be set aside for seniors in a standalone building designed by Bernheimer Architects, which will include a community room and amenities space.

The project also includes a 15,000-square-foot cultural center, currently envisioned as a permanent headquarters for an expansion of the Cultural Museum of African Art’s Eric Edwards collection, a cherished local collection that currently operates in Bed-Stuy. The new space is expected to include gallery, educational, and research spaces.

A new 120,000-square-foot K–8 public school designed by Architecture Research Office will also be built. Beginning in the 2027–28 school year, PS 287 will temporarily relocate to PS 67 around the corner, while Community Roots Middle School and Community Roots Lower School will permanently move to PS 369, the nearby Susan McKinney Secondary School. The school will remain in the same zone upon its return.

Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates will design 28,000 square feet of retail space and 36,000 square feet of outdoor space, including 21,000 square feet of publicly accessible areas with play spaces, an outdoor stage, gathering areas, and café seating.

The proposed plan will reconnect 240 Nassau to the neighborhood by reintroducing a historic street grid, activating the existing streetscape, and streamlining access to nearby parks.

“Seeing 240 Nassau move closer to becoming a reality is inspiring in so many ways,” Tameek Floyd, co-founder of GFB Development, said. “This project is setting a new precedent for what urban revitalization should look like: community centered, purpose driven, and creating generational impact.”

“240 Nassau provides much needed resources to our neighborhood, from affordable housing and a new school to community and cultural space. It reflects our shared commitment to closing the socioeconomic gap, creating safe spaces, and providing opportunities for the next generation to grow and thrive.”

RELATED:

The post 1,500-unit Downtown Brooklyn complex to enter public review next month first appeared on 6sqft.

This post was originally published here.