Real Estate Trands 2016 presentation to the Lake Elsinore Economic Development Workforce Committee including demographic information, housing data and legislative update.

1. The Voice for Real Estate
Economic Development Workforce Committee

3. 2014
2015
Lake Elsinore
2016

5. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

6. 2015 2016
Fast Food
Liquor stores
Bars
Auto Dealers

7. 2015
2016

8. SW Market @ A Glance
Southwest
California
Reporting
Period
Current
Period
Last
Period Year Ago
Change
from
Last
Period
Change
from
Year
Ago
Existing Home
Sales (SFR
Detached)
September
2016 982 1,095 946 10% 4%
Median Home Price $334,861$337,222$310,583 1% 7%
Unsold Inventory
Index (SFR Units) 2,348 2,478 2,592 5% 9%
Unsold Inventory
Index (Months) 2.4 2.4 3 ---% 20%
Median Time on
Market (Days) 46 54 60 15% 23%
Source: CRMLS

9. 0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Southwest California I-15 Corridor
Single Family Home Sales
Temecula Murrieta Lake Elsinore Wildomar

10. 0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Lake Elsinore 962 1,038 1,287 999 494 1,405 1,805 1,405 1,270 1,165 1,072 1,022 1,091 1,149
AxisTitle
Lake Elsinore Single Family Residential Sales History Chart

11. $0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
$500,000
Southwest California Homes I-15 Corridor
Median Price
Temecula Murrieta Lake Elsinore Wildomar

12. September Median Price:
2015 2016 %
Temecula $405,000 $437,500 7%
Murrieta $365,000 $385,000 5%
Menifee $309,000 $315,000 2%
Lake Elsinore $315,000 $331,000 5%
Wildomar $336,500 $370,000 9%
Canyon Lake $385,000 $428,000 10%
Hemet $207,000 $230,000 10%
San Jacinto $225,000 $252,250 11%
Perris $247,750 $265,000 6%
September 2016 Transaction Value*:
Temecula $81,663,182 Lake Elsinore $37,634,044
Murrieta $57,095,854 Wildomar $15,153,290
Menifee $52,309,745 Canyon Lake $17,699,249
Hemet $39,632,585 San Jacinto $15,362,800
Perris $20,186,094 Total $336,706,843
* Revenue generated by single family residential transactions for the month.

13. $0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Lake Elsinore $230,115 $323,681 $391,725 $433,996 $377,597 $230,459 $174,666 $187,347 $180,856 $187,696 $247,758 $281,742 $300,432 $326,886
+47%
46%
Lake Elsinore Single Family Home Median $$
-60%
-25%

14. 0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
1/12 4/12 7/12 10/12 1/13 4/13 7/13 10/13 1/14 4/14 7/14 10/14 1/15 4/15 7/15 10/15 1/16 4/16 7/16
Inventory Sales
Inventory v Sales

15. September 2016 Market Activity
By Sales Type
Standard Sale Bank Owned Short Sale
Active
% of
MKT Sold
% of
MKT Active
% of
MKT Sold
% of
MKT Active
% of
MKT Sold
% of
MKT
Temecula 476 95% 169 98% 6 1% 0 0% 12 2% 5 3%
Murrieta 422 94% 136 97% 7 2% 4 3% 17 4% 2 1%
Wildomar 107 96% 40 98% 0 0% 0 0% 3 3% 1 2%
Lake Elsinore 227 92% 110 96% 5 2% 4 3% 10 4% 1 1%
Menifee 288 92% 162 95% 1 0% 8 5% 15 5% 4 2%
Canyon Lake 97 95% 36 97% 8 8% 0 0% 5 5% 3 8%
Hemet 323 95% 160 94% 2 1% 1 1% 8 2% 1 1%
San Jacinto 129 92% 58 94% 2 1% 3 5% 8 6% 3 5%
Perris 135 94% 67 92% 4 3% 3 4% 3 2% 1 1%
Regional
Average
2204 94% 938 96% 35 1% 23 2% 81 3% 21 2%

17. Top and Bottom States for Jobs
The Best % Gain in 12
months
Utah 4.0%
Florida 3.8%
Oregon 3.4%
Washington 3.4%
California 3.2%
Georgia 3.2%
North Dakota 3.2%
Nevada 3.0%
Idaho 2.9%
The Worst % Gain in 12
months
West Virginia -0.7%
Mississippi 0.5%
Maine 0.5%
Montana 0.6%
Alaska 0.6%

18. Region
Last Cyclical
Peak Month
Last Cyclical
Peak Price
Jun-16
Median
%Chg From
Peak
Orange County Jun-07 $775,420 $759,490 -2.1%
San Diego County May-06 $622,380 $594,430 -4.5%
Ventura Couty Aug-06 $710,910 $674,310 -5.1%
CALIFORNIA May-07 $594,530 $519,440 -12.6%
Riverside County Jun-06 $431,710 $357,810 -17.1%
Los Angeles Metro May-07 $578,700 $477,230 -17.5%
Inland Empire Jun-06 $389,380 $319,100 -18.0%
Los Angeles County Sep-07 $625,810 $502,190 -19.8%
San Bernardino County Aug-06 $350,290 $245,220 -30.0%
Peak vs. 6/16 Median: CA

19. Region
Last Cyclical
Peak Month
Last Cyclical
Peak Price
Jun-16
Median
%Chg From
Cyclical Peak
San Francisco County May-07 $972,010 $1,350,000 38.9%
San Mateo County Oct-07 $1,020,000 $1,306,250 28.1%
Santa Clara County Apr-07 $865,000 $1,050,000 21.4%
Alameda County May-07 $709,420 $803,000 13.2%
San Francisco Bay Area May-07 $789,250 $841,960 6.7%
Marin County Jun-07 $1,149,390 $1,218,500 6.0%
Sonoma County Jan-06 $650,330 $608,000 -6.5%
CALIFORNIA May-07 $594,530 $519,440 -12.6%
Napa County Aug-06 $729,170 $619,000 -15.1%
Solano County Jun-06 $492,800 $390,000 -20.9%
Contra Costa County May-07 $923,150 $625,000 -32.3%
Peak vs. 6/16 Median: Bay Area
Not all markets are created equal

20. -4%
-3%
-2%
-1%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
QUARTERLYANNUALLY
2009 Largest Annual Drop since 1946 (-2.8%)
US GDP 2015: 2.6%; 2016 Q1: .8% Q2: 1.4%
Economic growth painfully slow

21. 0
20
40
60
80
100
120 Jan-05
Sep-05
May-06
Jan-07
Sep-07
May-08
Jan-09
Sep-09
May-10
Jan-11
Sep-11
May-12
Jan-13
Sep-13
May-14
Jan-15
Sep-15
May-16
Yet Consumer Confidence at 9 Year High
September 2016: 104.1

22. 0.7%
1.7%
1.8%
2.0%
2.3%
2.3%
2.4%
2.5%
2.6%
2.7%
2.7%
3.2%
3.6%
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0%
Ventura
Los Angeles
San Diego
Bakersfield
Modesto
Oakland
San…
Orange
Sacramento
Fresno MSA
Stockton
Inland…
San Jose
Silicon Valley Leads Job Growth
Inland Empire close behind
SERIES: Total Nonfarm Employment By Industry
SOURCE: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, CA Employment Development Division

23. 10
0
2
4
6
8
10
12 All Sellers
Length of residence is increasing

24. $175,000
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Net Cash Gain to Sellers Highest since 2007

25. 0.9% 0.8%
1.9%
5.7%
10.7%
21.3%
24.0%
31.8%
24.4%
9.0%
11.0%
12.4%
14.2%
12.0%
8.9%
7.3%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
1978 &
Earlier
1979 to
1984
1985 to
1989
1990 to
1994
1995 to
1999
2000 to
2005
2005 to
2009
2010 to
2013
California Homeowners by Length of Tenure, 2013
Under 55 55+
Boomers Not Moving as Often
71% of Californian’s aged 55+ haven’t moved since 1999

26. 57 56 56
54
52
50 50 50
48
46 45 45 45
41
32
31 30 29
27 26 26 25 25
22
20 20 19
18 17
14
13
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Housing Affordability In CA: by county
2016-Q2: % able to purchase median-priced home

27. Los Angeles: Net Exit to Inland Empire and Kern County
County
Moved
To/From
Total
Number
Moved to
Los
Angeles
County
Total
Number
Moved
from Los
Angeles
County
Total Net
Migration
Inland
Empire
25,777 50,531 -24,754
Kern 2,466 10,460 -7,816
Orange 23,887 31,435 -7,548
San Diego 8,916 7,240 1,676
Ventura 7,464 7,543 -79

28. 381,300
174,833 162,740
127,542
141,162
95,245 98,149 105,586
66,054
44,772
88,134
35,426 44,923
18,141
40,434
14,901 18,108
31,255
6,349 10,890
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
New Jobs vs. New Permits (2010-2015)
Jobs
Most Underbuilt Counties in California

29. 0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
Single Family Multi-Family
“Missing” 65,000 New Units Annually
Household Growth:
165,000/yr.
2015: 95,822 (42,959 sf, 52,863 mf)
2016p: 98,300 total units

30. Sales down for 2016 but Improve in 2017;
Price will Grow Steadily this Year and Next
407.3
413.0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017f
Thousands
Sales of Existing Detached Homes
$504
$526
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017f
Thousands
Median Price
Price
(Thousand)

31. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016p 2017f
SFH Resales(000s) 422.6 439.8 414.9 382.7 408.8 407.3 413.0
%Change 1.4% 4.1% -5.9% -7.8% 6.8% -0.4% 1.4%
Median Price
($000s)
$286.0 $319.3 $407.2 $446.9 $474.4 $503.9 $525.6
%Change -6.2% 11.6% 27.5% 9.8% 6.2% 6.2% 4.3%
Housing
Affordability Index
53% 51% 36% 30% 31% 33% 29%
30-Yr FRM 4.5% 3.7% 4.0% 4.2% 3.9% 3.6% 4.0%
California Housing Market Outlook

32. • Election results
• Interest rate increase
• Pent-up demand
• High-end: discretionary & slowing
• Low/Moderate-end: demand continues unabated
• Urban coastal CA slowing
• Inland and Central and Northern CA growing
• Migration patterns mirror housing affordability and jobs
• Oil prices
• Immigration crisis
• European Economy
• Chinese Economy
• Brexit fallout
What to look for/look out for in 2017

33. Who cares?
Leave already!
Homes for sale because ? won the Election

34. SWCLC
2015 Bill Tracker - Preliminary
Senate Assembly Gov Win/
Bill # Author Intent Position Status Stone Roth Morrell Melendez Waldron Jones Linder Medina
Brow
n Loss
AB1142 Gray R Mining S CHPT Y Y NVR NVR Y Y Y Y Y W
AB1643 Gonzalez D Workers Comp O VETO N NVR N Y N N Y Y V W
AB2143 Irwin D Electronic recording S CHPT Y Y Y NVR Y Y Y Y Y W
AB2220 Cooper D 100,000+ cities S CHPT N Y N NVR Y NVR Y Y Y W
AB2693 Dababneh D PACE disclosures S CHPT Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y W
AB2664 Irwin D UC Innovation S CHPT Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y W
AB2748 Gatto D Environmental disasters O VETO N Y N N N N Y Y V W
SB269 Roth D ADA S CHPT Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y W
SB654 Jackson D Parental Leave O G & A N NVR N Y Y N Y Y V W
SB822 Roth D Citrus disease S CHPT Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y W
SB867 Roth D Maddy Fund ext S CHPT Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y W
SB936 Herzberg D Business loans S CHPT NVR Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y W
SB940 Vidak R Landowner S CHPT Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y W
SB1261 Stone R Physicians residence S CHPT Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y W
SBX2-2 Hernandez D MCO tax S CHPT N Y N N Y Y Y Y Y W
AB1066 Gonzalez D Ag Wrkrs overtime O CHPT N NVR N N N N Y Y Y L
AB2729 Williams D Oil wells O CHPT N Y Y N N N Y Y Y L
SB3 Leno D Min Wage O CHPT N Y N N N N NVR Y Y L
SB817 Roth D VLF S VETO Y Y Y NVR Y Y Y Y V L
SB907 Galgiani D Mtg Forgiveness S VETO Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y V L
SB1150 Leno D Successors interest O CHPT N NVR N NVR N N N NVR Y L
SB1167 Leyva D Indoor workers O CHPT N Y N N N N N Y Y L
SB1234 De Leon D Retirement Plans O CHPT N Y N N N N Y Y Y L
SB1383 Lara D Cow Farts O CHPT N Y N N N N N N Y L
Voting Record 91% 70% 87% 84% 96% 100% 74% 65% 63%
Supported Bills Opposed Bills








35. The Council has adopted the following positions on the California State November 2016 ballot initiatives:
Proposition 51, California Public Education Facilities Bond Initiative SUPPORT
Proposition 52, California Medi-Cal Hospital Reimbursement Initiative SUPPORT
Proposition 53, California Public Vote on Bonds Initiative OPPOSE
Proposition 54, California "Legislature Transparency Act" Amendment SUPPORT
Proposition 55, California Tax Extension to Fund Education and Healthcare OPPOSE
Proposition 56, California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax NBR
Proposition 57, California Parole and Juvenile Trial Opportunity Modification OPPOSE
Proposition 58, California Multilingual Education Act OPPOSE
Proposition 59, California Overturn of Citizens United Act Advisory Question OPPOSE
Proposition 60, California Condoms in Pornographic Films Initiative NBR
Proposition 61, California Drug Price Standards Initiative OPPOSE
Proposition 62, California Death Penalty Repeal NBR
Proposition 63, California "Safety for All" Gun Control Initiative NBR
Proposition 64, California Marijuana Legalization Initiative OPPOSE
Proposition 65, California Carry-Out Bag Revenue Initiative OPPOSE
Proposition 66, California Death Penalty Procedure Regulation Initiative NBR
Proposition 67, California Plastic Bag Ban Referendum OPPOSE
A coalition of the
Temecula Valley, Murrieta, Lake Elsinore Valley, Wildomar, Menifee Valley and Perris Valley
Chambers of Commerce
For more detailed information, please visit: http://tinyurl.com/jaorshe


36. Prop 57 deems the following crimes ‘non-violent’ and makes the perpetrators eligible for EARLY
PAROLE and RELEASE into local communities:
• Rape by intoxication • Rape of an unconscious person • Human Trafficking involving sex act with
minors • Drive-by shooting • Assault with a deadly weapon • Hostage taking • Attempting to explode
a bomb at a hospital or school • Domestic violence involving trauma • Supplying a firearm to a gang
member • Hate crime causing physical injury • Failing to register as a sex offender • Arson •
Discharging a firearm on school grounds • Lewd acts against a child 14 or 15 • False imprisonment
of an elder through violence. *partial list
​Here are five more reasons to VOTE NO on 57:
​1) 57 authorizes state government bureaucrats to reduce many sentences for “good behavior,” even
for inmates convicted of murder, rape, child molestation and human trafficking.
2) 57 permits the worst career criminals to be treated the same as first-time offenders, discounting
strong sentences imposed by a judge.
3) ‘57 effectively overturns key provisions of Marcy's Law, ‘3-Strikes and You’re Out,’ Victims’ Bill of
Rights, Californians Against Sexual Exploitation Act – measures enacted by voters that have
protected victims and made communities Safer’—Susan Fisher, Former Chairwoman State Parole
Board
4) 57 forces victims trying to put their lives back together to re-live the crimes committed against
them over and over again, with every new parole hearing.
5) 57 will likely result in higher crime rates as at least 16,000 dangerous criminals, including those
previously convicted of murder and rape, would be eligible for early release.
Finally, Prop. 57 places all these new privileges and rights for convicted criminals into the California
Constitution, where they cannot be changed by the Legislature.
Make no mistake. If Prop. 57 passes, every home, every neighborhood, every school will be less safe
than it is today.
Commentary courtesy of Assembly Member Melissa Melendez

37. For more information on what you’ve seen today:
Your very own copy of the 18 page RPR Demographic Report:
http://tinyurl.com/zc8ywd7
Southwest California Legislative Council Proposition
Recommendations: http://tinyurl.com/jaorshe