October sales figures, per Greenwich Association of Realtors

as is

October 2017 Greenwich Sales

November 16, 2017 (Greenwich, CT) - The Greenwich Association of REALTORS® announces the statistics for home sales in The Town of Greenwich, CT for the month of October 2017.

There were 40 single-family residential closings reported during this period according to figures provided by The Greenwich Multiple Listing Service, Inc., the multiple listing service used by REALTORS® in the Greenwich area.

The number of single-family residential closings increased, compared to October 2016 when there were 39 closings in October. The median sale price for a single-family home increased to $1,638,000 from $1,625,000 the median sales price in October 2016.

The average days on the market (DOM) for residential homes was 193 days; which was a decrease from 249 days in October 2016.

"This years October sales are in-line with last years sales, with an increase by one sale for October 2017, closing in on forty Sales VS. October 2016 ending with thirty-nine sales. The median sale price is very similar to last years, with a little bit of an increase to $1,638,000 from $1,625,000 in October 2017. The Average Days on Market has seen a significant decrease from 249 in October 2016 to now which is 193 days on market.

Riverside and Cos Cob were our strongest sectors this month; Riverside closing in on nine sales, from six in October 2016 with a significant median price increase to $2,950,000 from $1,050,000 and Cos Cob closing in on eight sales when there were zero in October 2016, with a median price of $1,183,250. As we are soon approaching the end of the year, the market seems to be acting similarly to the close of last year", stated BK Bates, 2017 President of the Greenwich Association of REALTORS®.

Take aways: I'm always suspicious of the "days on market" calculation used by the GAR, so I'd be wary of that one.

Good to see that Cos Cob saw 8 sales, vs 0 in October of last year.

The "significant" median price increase in Riverside from $1,183,250 to $2,950,00 can almost certainly be attributed to 2016 sales of building lots/teardowns and 2017 sales of new construction. It does reflect the changing economic conditions of this part of town, but if you own one of those teardowns, don't start planning uses for your $3 million windfall.

Old Church Road sale price reported

320 Old Church Road, $3.2 million. 483 days on market for this new construction, and started back then at $3.995. We've discussed this house several times during its sale history, so no need to repeat all that. I will, however, note again that "green" features and Crestron auto-home systems don't sell houses in Greenwich or, if they do, command no premium.

This home is at the height of Green Standards from the air purification system to the geo-thermal heating/cooling, Crestron Home automation system, whole house distributed built-in audio and surround sound system in family room.

Not enough to outweigh the price reduction required by the design and the site, which was carved out of ledge.

Uh oh - Senator Al Franken is a sexual abuser

Thank you, Jesus!

Al Franken grabbed my breasts and thrust his tongue down my throat.

He's been pretty much doing the same thing to the country since he (fraudulently) won his senate seat, but in view of our current drama, this is fun.

Coming on top of yesterday's revelation that Congress has paid over $15 million of our tax dollars to settle various sexual abuse claims by its members, I think it's time for the appointment of a special prosecutor.

"I grew up in the 60s, so I just don't know better"

Given the indistinguishable circus clowns we regularly send to Washington, maybe we should do this on a national scale

We're in the best of hands

Bolton, CT town selectman election settled by a coin toss.

Eremita and Democrat Kim Miller received the same number of votes, 718, in last week’s election, creating a tie for the final seat on the board.

A recount Monday upheld the tie, and the candidates agreed to let the decision be decided by a coin toss rather than a special election, as allowed by the town charter.

Eremita, Miller, and Town Clerk Elizabeth C. Waters all tossed coins Tuesday in Town Hall. Eremita won because his coin matched Waters’, with both showing tails. Miller’s came up heads.

“It’s an old New England small town at its best,” Eremita said of the flip. “It’s the most fun I’ve had so far as a selectman.”

Tiny Bolton saved an estimated $2,500-$3,000 expense by avoiding  a special election. As a country, we'd save billions. Of course, careful preparation would be necessary:

"From the beginning of the world until the end of time" — Greenwich wants to tweak that

Aaron Hernandez lends his brainpower to our BOE

I used to love drafting that ancient phrase into settlement documents because it summoned the majesty of English Common Law and incorporated utter finality into otherwise-banal civil disagreements. Apparently, our new town leaders aren't as appreciative of its meaning.

The town is trying to replace the lights at the existing GHS football stadium, install new ones at fields on its northern border and is considering expanding/rebuilding the football areas itself, all of which is prohibited by a court settlement it reached with neighbors in 2003. So, being Greenwich, we want to sue, but sue whom, our former Selectmen, the P&Z board of 2003, the then-existing school board and the RTM, all of which signed off on the original agreement?

I'll search for the link to that settlement (I've posted it here before, and I'll dig it up again), but Old Church Road resident Bill Effros and his high school neighbors are absolutely correct when they state that the town is forbidden, by its own agreement, to expand the use of the football field, install more lighting, add parking, bathrooms to the stadium, etc. etc. All of these terms were originally part of an agreement Greenwich made with neighbors when it took the Hillside Road property via eminent domain, and they were incorporated, word-for-word, in the later, 1983 suit brought by Effros and his neighbors. And as I have also written here before, the presiding judge in that suit insisted that every single government body in Greenwich with any jurisdiction over the matter sign off on the settlement before he would accept it.

Which was done, with full deliberation and consent. That the parents of a new generation of high school football players now consider the terms of the agreement improvident is irrelevant; the terms were written to be unmodifiable, forever, and I see no evidence of mistake of fact, or fraud or duress employed by either party in reaching that settlement. I'm not attacking high school football (though I'd never let one of my own children batter his brains to mush even more thoroughly than 8 hours in a public school classroom can accomplish on its own), but the terms of use of the high school were clearly established when it was being built back in the late 60s and reinforced and incorporated in perpetuity by the 2003 court settlement. Mr. Effros can be a polarizing gadfly (which naturally appeals to my own soul), but the law is clearly on his side. 

So why are we now preparing to spend multi-thousands of dollars litigating to overturn what we ourselves agreed to?

Trump hatred swamps CT elections

Slippery slope

It wasn't just Greenwich: anti-trumpeters swarmed the polls, defeating Republicans across the state

(From the Daily Caller, which, for those unfamiliar with the publication, is as libertarian-far-right as I am)

The incendiary nature of national politics in the Trump era trickled down to the local level in Fairfield, Conn., where Democrats routed their opponents, garnering a 23 to 17 majority on the Representative Town Meeting (RTM), a hold over term from the days of early New England government that translates to town council.

Alex Plitsas, a Republican RTM candidate for Fairfield’s 7th district, told The Daily Caller News Foundation that Trump’s influence on local elections throughout Connecticut was unmistakable.

“How do you know that’s just not an excuse for poor performance? Well, one, it wasn’t a couple of candidates, it was Republicans across the board. We weren’t just beaten, we were annihilated at the polls,” he said. “Second, in many of these local races, including several in my town, there were Democrats on the ballot who literally didn’t campaign, I mean did nothing. No signs, no advertising, no door-to-door, no engagements with people, nothing, who won or came very close to winning.”

Pam Iacono, a Republican RTM candidate for Fairfield’s 8th district, described the phenomenon as force of nature that herself and her fellow Republicans found themselves powerless to stop.

“We got caught up in what I call the Trump Tsunami,” Iacono told TheDCNF. “We did a good job getting our base out but it wasn’t enough because the people who came out to vote were the angry voters, who were upset with the Trump administration. They wanted to send a message and they did, in droves.”
“I ran candidate recruitment,” she said. “I know in speaking with a lot of the other candidates, there were people that were approached and said I like you but I can’t vote for you because you’re a Republican and I don’t like Donald Trump.”

Plitsas, a combat veteran and former Pentagon official, explained that anti-Trump sentiment seemed to hold sway over the electorate, despite the fact that the highest office on any ballot in the state was that of mayor.

“Without an executive, these elections were truly about local issues. Nobody was running on an anti-Trump or pro-Trump platform,” Plitsas told TheDCNF. Traditionally close races were not even close. Democrats were out in droves. In some cases 25 to 30 percent more Democrats than Republican voters turned out.”

Plitsas illustrated the momentum enjoyed by Democratic candidates, pointing out that many won or came very close to winning, despite a noticeable lack of campaigning relative to their Republican opponents.

“In one case the board of finance chairman in our town, who is very well known, who’s been in office for a number of years, spent a lot of money, was out there going door-to-door speaking to everybody, he only won by 50 votes against a guy who didn’t campaign,” he said. “Quite frankly you could’ve had Mickey Mouse on the ballot; as long as it had a ‘D’ next to it, the guy won.”

The finance board race perfectly encapsulated the Trump phenomenon, Iacono said. Incumbent Republican incumbent Chris Dewitt ran against a virtually unknown Democratic challenger, Chris Skoczen, who almost won despite a total lack of campaigning.

“This is a man that’s a newcomer to politics in Fairfield and we don’t even know what he looks like because he never even showed up at a debate,” Iacono said.

Worrisome.

State budget passed, deficits resume

Hartford celebrates

Billions and billions.

Less than three weeks after legislators approved a new state budget, eroding revenues have opened deficits topping $175 million this fiscal year and nearing $150 million in 2018-19.

Eroding income and sales tax receipts in particular also probably have worsened the multi-billion-dollar projected shortfall Connecticut must solve after the next election.

The new deficit estimate for the current fiscal year also falls dangerously close to the threshold that would force Malloy to craft a deficit-mitigation plan.

New state budget isn’t sustainable… 

Even before Monday’s report, one of the chief criticisms of the new budget was that it sets up the winners of the next state election to face a deficit much worse than the one lawmakers just tackled.

Analysts had said state finances, unless adjusted in the present budget, were on pace to run $1.6 billion in deficit this fiscal year and $1.9 billion in the red in 2018-19 — or a biennial shortfall of $3.5 billion.

Much of that gap stemmed from surging retirement benefit costs and sluggish overall revenue growth.

Legislators boasted that they averted the shortfall without increasing income or sales tax rates, relying on smaller tax hikes and significant spending cuts. But they also diverted hundreds of millions of dollars from off-budget, specialized and one-time sources — moves that shift burdens onto the next governor and legislature.

Further complicating matters, the new budget orders tax cuts for businesses, estates, retirees, students and others — about $130 million per year. But it delays most of the relief until after the next election, when analysts say state finances will be in worse shape than they are now.

Even as the new budget was adopted last month, nonpartisan analysts warned that plan wasn’t sustainable.

If continued into the 2019-20 and 2020-21 fiscal years, the plan would amass red ink totaling $1.9 billion and $2.7 billion respectively — gaps of 10 and 13 percent.

In other words, while legislators averted a potential, two-year deficit of $3.5 billion, they set up the winners of the next state election to close a $4.6 billion gap.

… And post-election finances look worse

The new report downgrades expectations for income and sales tax receipts not just in the current budget, but at the start of the next two-year cycle as well.

For example, projections for income tax receipts in the 2020 fiscal year now are about $70 million less than they were three weeks ago, when analysts warned of a major post-election deficit.

Similarly, sales tax projections for the first fiscal year after the election are down about $56 million from where they were three weeks ago.

This may be a good time to remind readers that I represent sellers, as well as buyers.

 

Nudged awake by his Move on Greenwich wife, Sandy Livtack discovers he's been elected to office

Who am I? Why am I here?

"And I'll happily serve", says he. "I thought I was going to Disney World", the 87-year-old Livtack told FWIW, "but apparently that's not the case. Whatever, just drop me off, steer me to a comfy chair, and I'm set; ready to serve the town".

Loss on Lauder Lane

34 Lauder Lane, purchased off-market in 2011 for $3.8 million, has resold, again off-market, for $3.475. The sellers renovated it after their 2011 purchase, and put it up for sale on the MLS unsuccessfully, at $4.350 in 2016-2017. When that listing expired, two agents from different firms put this deal together.

I really liked the house, and its location, and even its price (approximately), but the market didn't value it the way I did, obviously.

Here's a link to the original listing, with pictures.

Overprice, kill your chances

17 Winterset Road (off Londonderry, off Stanwich), has dropped, again, and is now priced at $2.350 million. First broker had it at $3 million back in May, 2015. The craziness of this sort of thing is that there are plenty of houses in each price range, so there was absolutely no excuse for pricing this 1967 house at that original $3 million: there were, and still are, far better homes available at that price.

The new price is certainly more reasonable, but the owner has now sat tied to a property she doesn't want for 2 1/2 years, while the market declines and her own house appears less and less desirable as it is rejected by successive waves of buyers. 

Dumb.