August median sold price, units, DOM, and $/sq.ft.

The median sold price dropped slightly in August to $179,000 (from $180,000 in July).  Units sold remained healthy at 457 units, but were off 10% from July’s 509 units.  Home buying seasonality factors will start to come into play in the coming months.  And then when (if) the Home Buyers Credit expires at the end of November, December units sold should be relatively bleak.

Days on market continues to fall.  This can be explained by the increasing percentage of bank owned properties comprising monthly sales (48% of units sold for August).  Buyers have learned that bank owned properties take far less time to close than short sales, and so continue to gravitate to the foreclosed properties; thus causing average DOM to decline.

Sold price per square foot dropped 1.2% from July to August.  At this rate of decline, the median sold price per square foot will drop below $100 in October.

The make-up of August sales is as follows:

  • Bank-owned properties – 48%
  • Short sales – 22%
  • Equity sales – 29%

For those readers who prefer the median sold price for houses and condos combined, August’s combined median sold price was $166,500; down from July’s combined median of $175,000.

Month Year

# Sold

Sold Price

Sold Price per SqFt

Average DOM

Aug 2009

457

$179,000

$102.06

117

Jul 2009

509

$180,000

$103.34

126

Jun 2009

532

$180,317

$103.97

137

May 2009

423

$175,000

$102.31

139

Apr 2009

428

$189,950

$105.55

133

Mar 2009

367

$200,000

$105.94

133

Feb 2009

294

$204,000

$111.45

133

Jan 2009

232

$200,000

$113.15

119

 Dec 2008

294

$218,950

$121.74

145

Nov 2008

269

$220,000

$122.24

152

 Oct 2008

354

$230,000

$131.43

144

 Sep 2008

358

$239,250

$136.72

145

 Aug 2008

321

$250,000

$142.14

140

 Jul 2008

397

$251,000

$145.48

139

 Jun 2008

369

$262,500

$148.05

142

 May 2008

314

$260,215

$152.30

134

 Apr 2008

314

$275,000

$154.05

172

 Mar 2008

238

$274,000

$150.93

166

 Feb 2008

195

$289,000

$156.48

149

 Jan 2008

165

$285,000

$170.23

146

Dec 2007

228

$283,950

$167.22

143

Nov 2007

204

$299,750

$172.24

126

Oct 2007

241

$296,000

$173.55

116

Sep 2007

230

$299,945

$179.46

114

Aug 2007

311

$305,000

$182.49

118

Jul 2007

300

$315,000

$189.78

113

Jun 2007

329

$320,000

$196.78

104

May 2007

364

$313,200

$190.81

107

Apr 2007

320

$309,500

$193.93

121

Mar 2007

324

$315,000

$189.61

121

 Feb 2007

269

$315,000

$191.18

126

 Jan 2007

245

$312,900

$199.79

133

Dec 2006

291

$309,000

$193.51

114

Nov 2006

281

$318,000

$197.32

111

 Oct 2006

363

$312,400

$201.44

105

Sep 2006

344

$314,950

$198.08

98

Aug 2006

349

$325,000

$210.92

94

Jul 2006

373

$335,000

$210.62

93

Jun 2006

424

$339,000

$214.54

91

May 2006

374

$339,950

$219.05

99

Apr 2006

368

$334,600

$212.08

88

Mar 2006

387

$340,000

$215.54

99

 Feb 2006

283

$335,000

$217.29

101

 Jan 2006

274

$365,000

$216.38

98

Dec 2005

333

$355,000

$217.31

89

Nov 2005

385

$349,000

$220.00

81

Oct 2005

484

$359,450

$223.06

77

Sep 2005

531

$354,500

$219.26

77

Aug 2005

582

$360,500

$220.52

73

Jul 2005

608

$353,000

$218.99

71

Jun 2005

679

$350,000

$215.69

69

May 2005

644

$333,250

$209.95

68

Apr 2005

558

$326,750

$207.57

77

Mar 2005

584

$325,000

$200.17

81

 Feb 2005

342

$318,500

$197.54

88

 Jan 2005

341

$310,000

$195.19

85

Dec 2004

450

$312,500

$190.72

77

Nov 2004

448

$309,950

$191.62

63

Oct 2004

512

$299,250

$188.72

53

Sep 2004

496

$292,750

$185.78

61

Aug 2004

505

$285,000

$182.95

56

Jul 2004

544

$304,300

$179.28

61

Jun 2004

533

$285,000

$172.16

65

May 2004

476

$278,750

$169.64

65

Apr 2004

526

$259,950

$158.08

67

Mar 2004

508

$245,000

$142.56

71

 Feb 2004

365

$237,000

unavailable

81

 Jan 2004

379

$229,000

unavailable

78

Dec 2003

441

$240,000

unavailable

82

Nov 2003

444

$220,750

unavailable

78

Oct 2003

430

$219,880

unavailable

76

Sep 2003

587

$223,000

unavailable

71

Aug 2003

512

$220,000

unavailable

75

Jul 2003

533

$210,000

unavailable

77

Jun 2003

475

$207,000

unavailable

77

May 2003

450

$198,950

unavailable

85

Apr 2003

478

$197,750

unavailable

82

 Mar 2003

428

$192,000

unavailable

77

 Feb 2003

321

$186,895

unavailable

79

 Jan 2003

316

$186,000

unavailable

96

Dec 2002

379

$193,500

unavailable

93

Nov 2002

423

$190,000

unavailable

82

Oct 2002

483

$189,900

unavailable

83

Sep 2002

410

$174,000

unavailable

85

Aug 2002

459

$180,000

unavailable

74

Jul 2002

469

$176,000

unavailable

83

Jun 2002

445

$185,000

unavailable

80

May 2002

470

$178,450

unavailable

77

Apr 2002

360

$169,500

unavailable

93

 Mar 2002

377

$169,000

unavailable

84

 Feb 2002

323

$170,900

unavailable

89

 Jan 2002

268

$172,475

unavailable

99

Dec 2001

287

$182,000

unavailable

86

Nov 2001

323

$161,500

unavailable

85

Oct 2001

357

$166,500

unavailable

79

Sep 2001

355

$168,000

unavailable

81

Aug 2001

448

$160,350

unavailable

84

Jul 2001

433

$169,900

unavailable

90

Jun 2001

426

$166,225

unavailable

96

May 2001

404

$162,050

unavailable

97

Apr 2001

370

$158,750

unavailable

94

 Mar 2001

385

$159,900

unavailable

97

 Feb 2001

294

$159,950

unavailable

103

 Jan 2001

264

$165,000

unavailable

102

Dec 2000

272

$156,500

unavailable

100

Nov 2000

355

$154,500

unavailable

93

 Oct 2000

348

$153,000

unavailable

98

Sep 2000

356

$160,000

unavailable

104

Aug 2000

412

$163,375

unavailable

94

Jul 2000

368

$155,000

unavailable

110

Jun 2000

466

$165,845

unavailable

104

May 2000

363

$158,000

unavailable

105

Apr 2000

312

$155,000

unavailable

113

 Mar 2000

339

$162,700

unavailable

102

 Feb 2000

244

$149,620

unavailable

110

 Jan 2000

217

$156,000

unavailable

112

Dec 1999

264

$155,000

unavailable

118

Nov 1999

293

$149,900

unavailable

98

Oct 1999

289

$147,895

unavailable

108

Sep 1999

311

$157,000

unavailable

106

Aug 1999

360

$148,500

unavailable

112

Jul 1999

375

$147,800

unavailable

105

Jun 1999

372

$150,000

unavailable

103

May 1999

307

$145,500

unavailable

106

Apr 1999

324

$151,700

unavailable

111

Mar 1999

308

$151,000

unavailable

121

Feb 1999

249

$148,900

unavailable

120

Jan 1999

210

$143,000

unavailable

115

 Dec 1998

265

$140,000

unavailable

118

 Nov 1998

279

$153,000

unavailable

126

Oct 1998

286

$142,825

unavailable

115

Sep 1998

279

$144,500

unavailable

102

Aug 1998

331

$145,000

unavailable

113

Jul 1998

335

$150,000

unavailable

108

Jun 1998

351

$148,500

unavailable

103

May 1998

302

$145,500

unavailable

99

Apr 1998

235

$149,000

unavailable

111

 Mar 1998

267

$142,500

unavailable

114

Feb 1998

201

$139,900

unavailable

126

 Jan 1998

165

$149,490

unavailable

131

 

Note: The medians table above is updated on a monthly basis. The median home price data reported covers the cities of Reno, Nevada and Sparks, Nevada [NNRMLS Area #100]. Residential data includes Site/Stick Built properties only. Data excludes Condo/Townhouse, Manufactured/Modular and Shared Ownership properties. Data courtesy of the Northern Nevada Regional MLS – September 2009.

49 comments

  1. MikeZ

    Wow, $179K median. And that’s with an $8K tax credit in place propping up prices. $170K must be right around the corner.

  2. CommercialLender

    Where is BB anymore? He called this spot-on a long time ago. Or, is he posting as a new name? Well, he was right. I have to admit I did not think it’d go as low as he said, low, but not this low.

    $179K and that’s the tail end of the season. I shudder to think of where we’ll be oh, say, in January.

  3. FutureRenoHomebuyer

    Downward price trends continue. Good for prospective buyers. Notso for prospective sellers.

    A July/August bump seemed baked in due to seasonality factors, 1st timer tax credit running out, and the relative bargains out there. National media wants everyone to believe the bottom is in. This is no bump, though. Nov/Dec might show pretty gruesome numbers.

    After all this time watching the Reno RE market, it’s still stunning to see distressed sales (REO +short) comprising 70% of sales. Until that number comes down, it will continue to be a buyers market, and patience will be rewarded with continuing discounts.

    This is a housing depression, no two ways about it. Short of pure exhaustion (no more houses left to foreclose upon), does anyone see a catalyst that will turn this market around?

    And with all that said, there’s still tons of denial. Just check the listing prices in Newlands Manor, or Montreux, or even Somersett…. Go figure.

  4. Reno Ignoramus

    Long time readers of this blog will recall that for years the median price was calculated on a metric that included houses and condos. Then for some reason, a few months ago, Guy changed the metric to exclude condos. If we use the old metric, which seemed to work just fine for more than two years, the median is down to $166,500. Bantering Bear always took exception to the new metric, calling it changing horses in midstream to make the median price look better than it really was.
    A median of $166,500 puts the median price down about 60% from it’s all time bubbled up high in Q3 of 2005.
    Guy, it would be nice if we could get some priceband info, such as how many properties sold below $100K, below $200K, $300K, $400K, etc.

    Thanks, Guy.

  5. SkrapGuy

    70% of all sales continue to be either REO or short sales. And that is with only about 30% of all NODs ever going to TD. Can you image what this market would look like if say 60% or 70% of NODs ended up being actual foreclosures? RI pointed out the other day that there are now somehing like 6,000 properties that have had a NOD recorded that are somewhere in limbo between NOD and TD. What if just half them came on the market as REO? What would 3,000 new REOs do to this market??

  6. Bear Hunter

    So, where is the BanteringBear? Hope the Bear is OK.

  7. homepop

    My fear is that the federal government is going to insert itself even more into this process, with the aim of propping up home prices by any means necessary. This can drag out a housing recovery for years, if not decades…but they cannot see beyond the next election.

  8. Sully

    The gov’t, fed reserve (et all) have done everything they can; they are out of bullets – just haven’t told anyone yet.

    China is now a net seller of treasuries, how long before Japan is also?

    Keep printing Ben, we may need to use the dollar for firewood soon.

  9. homepop

    Sully,

    Bankruptcy courts can be given the power to wipe out hundreds of thousands of dollars of mortgage debt, thereby preventing foreclosure.

    AND/OR

    The US government can make the underwater people whole by giving them a check in the amount of what they paid for their house minus what it is worth today and modifying the subsequent balance.

    I have seen/heard both of these options mentioned in the past week or two. The responsible taxpayer gets hosed either way.

    HP

  10. johnny

    here’s a chuckler..

    the builder had a unti for sale at 176k, I offered 160k CASH
    They countered with 173k.. I walked!

    see ya!

  11. Guy Johnson

    R.I.

    Here’s the breakdown of August sales as requested:
    <= $100K 21% <= $150K 41% <= $200K 63% <= $300K 84% <= $400K 92% <= $500K 95% Note: these percentages are cumulative. Regarding the changing of the median number to exclude condos, yes BB was pretty bummed out. I think that's why he left the blog. 😉

  12. bondstevenbond

    long live the Bear!

  13. FutureRenoHomebuyer

    Guy,
    Very useful follow up, thanks. ~37 units sold above $400k is an upside surprise for me. Am I too negative?

    Meanwhile, I’m waiting for the Bear to come on down from the top rope with an atomic elbow. My guess is that he’s on vacation, and wifey is keeping him away from the internet. (mirror imaging…) If he’s gone for good, though, we all obviously miss him.

  14. Reno Ignoramus

    Thank you Guy for the info. We have seen these percentages holding for many many months now. Interesting that one-fifth of all houses now selling are under $100K. The market over $400K continues to be largely a figment of those sellers imaginations. Four years ago, a house selling for $400K was not far off the median price. Today the $400K and up segment comprises only 8% of all sales. Truly a redefining of what “high end” means now. How very interesting to see what the Reno-Sparks real estate market looks like without Voodoo loans available at the mall kiosk.

  15. MikeZ

    RE: “1st timer tax credit running out, and the relative bargains out there.”

    The $8K credit almost hooked me, a $15K credit would definitely do it for me. If that passes, I see myself buying next year.

  16. Reno Ignoramus

    Another important aspect of this market also continues on. That is that 70% of all sales continue to produce no “move-up” buyer. Almost 50% of all sales don’t even have a human being as the seller. Washington Mutual and Country Wide might sound like they are human, but they are not.
    Until this aspect of the market changes, and returns to the normal market dynamic where the seller of the $200K house moves up to buy a $400K house, and the seller of the $400K house moves up to buy a $600K house, etc. the upper end of the market is going to continue to be the dead doornail that it is now.

  17. Norton

    Sure why not have a $15K tax credit? Why not a $30K tax credit? Why not just send everybody a check for $50K? Tax free of course. It’s not like the country needs the tax revenue or anything. Let’s prop up and bail out the housing markets at whatever cost.

  18. southworth

    A tax credit still won’t help if you cannot get financing. We just sold our house in Washington State and want to buy in Reno. We have 60% down payment for a $190,000 price range, have regular social security income, have six figures in the bank in addition to the down payment, have a 800+ credit rating, have no credit card debt or car payments, but the banks will not qualify us because of a negative $200 monthly cash flow on a rental property and the fact that my spouse’s business (a sole proprietorship) does not have two years operation in Nevada. At least this is what they said. I thought that qualifying would not be a problem with the amount of our down payment, our credit history, and what we additionally have in the bank. Perhaps if they change the rules on the tax credit, we can find something we can pay cash for.

  19. Irv

    Southworth,

    For whatever it is worth, here is how the bank’s loan officer would look a your financial snapshot:

    First, your spouse’s business is unfortunately too young to be deemed creditworthy as a repayment source, so it is disregarded. Usually two to three years of income tax returns, showing stability of an income level, will be required. The net income will be averaged. They look for ongoing income streams, not savings in the bank, in terms of justification for making the loan.

    Second, debt-to-income ratio is going to limit your available debt service income to roughly 1/4th of your monthly social security income, which appears to be your sole source of income.
    (Savings in the bank don’t count, but this is a subjective plus for you, as it shows the loan officer you do have an emergency fall-back fund; however, the debt service formula still must be met. The loan officer cannot bypass that rule, because there are too many pieces of new business to consider that will meet that rule, for him to waive it. Loan officers strive to avoid criticism by their team leaders for making decisions outside of standard criteria, when there is other new business to write that doesn’t require a waiver.

    That 1/4th of your SS income must cover the loan payment, property tax, HOA fees (if any) and homeowner’s insurance on the house. If your SS income is perhaps a hypothetical $1,600 a month, that leaves you with $400 a month for housing. Assume on a $190k house, that about $3,000 per year covers property taxes, homeowners insurance and condo or HOA fees. That is $250 per month, leaving you with $150 per month for debt service to come frome that 25% of your monthly income allocable to your housing costs, under the traditional formula. That won’t cover much of a mortgage, unfortunately. You will need a $70k mortgage, by your numbers, and that could cost over $340 per month for a 30 yr fixed at current rates, with your down payment and credit score. So you see it doesn’t formulate for the lending officer.

    On these small loans to modest means applicants, it is hard for the loan officer to push the ratio, since the margin for living expenses is so slim. Your savings helps, and do shop around — try the major banks, on a direct lender basis. I know that some can go to 35% debt-to-income ratio for an 800 credit score borrower, if you can prove up reserves, and if you are their banking customer. For cases where the monthly income leaves a larger living expense margin after debt service, they will even go to 40%, again if you can prove-up significant reserves not earmarked for retirement living expenses, and if you are worthy customer with them.

    If that doesn’t work, I suggest you rent until your wife’s proprietorship income will count in the formula. Come April of 2010, she will be filing her 2009 tax year 1040, so she will have another year to show for her earnings. By then prices won’t likely be going up in Reno anyway.

    Good luck.

  20. Gerry R.

    Foreclosures up 18% from last year? This meltdown is just getting legs under it, There’s not even close to being enough tax credits to offset the coming equity loss…

    Seems to me that prices will only be getting better for perspective buyers….

  21. WorriedGuy

    Can someone share with me their thoughts on what might be a fair price at the current market for a 1990’s type Southwest Reno home with about 3,000 Sqft. on about a 1/3 acre. Thanks.

  22. southworth

    Irv – Thank you for your thoughtful and helpful explanation. This is all very frustrating, but rules are rules, I guess. What I am finding interesting is that rents in Reno (for anything decent) are more than our projected house payment based on the numbers I provided. Arghhhh!!!!!

  23. Sully

    WorriedGuy, I was looking in that area for a long time and finally gave up, as the asking price was far higher than I felt it was worth.

    That being said, I would guess a fair value would be around 300K for the house you described, depending on upgrades (the nicer the nice the higher the price).

    RI, BB or SkrapGuy might have a better insight as they have been here longer!

  24. CommercialLender

    Southworth,

    You have an interesting post. Try all-cash buy or a seller carry behind an otherwise all-cash. It would take the right seller, of course, one who does not need every nickel of cash out and values passive income, and certainly not a foreclosed bank as seller. Also try FHA (I’m not a single family guy and don’t know that much about FHA). Finally, recall renting is the new owning! It is very highly probable both rents and home values will continue downward for at least another 9 months in Reno, while unlikely mortgage rates will skyrocket in that time, so a 9-12 month rental would not be a bad option for now.

  25. WorriedGuy

    Thanks for the reply Sully. I was thinking around $325K myself. $105 per sqft.? But unfortunately you are correct, unless you can pick a home up through foreclosure, it seems that flippers are trying to get $400K out of these type of homes in the Southwest Reno area.

  26. WorriedGuy

    Also, even if you got the home in Southwest Reno for around $350K. I have noticed that the property taxes on these homes are up around $5K in some cases. So that would be nearing 1.5% to 2% property tax per year on what you paid for the home. This is getting around FL levels in property taxes and good luck on a reassessment. So this is a factor in why these homes are not moving.

  27. RRB Fan

    Worried Guy … I’ve also been looking in the same area and have set my target price at $100/ft sq, but unfortunately anything that is nice is quite a bit more. Take a look at 1791 Three Mile Dr. — you get a lot of house but no usable yard. Personally I’d want something smaller — say around 2K sq ft, but there is literally nothing compelling that is newer in that size for 200K.

  28. WorriedGuy

    Actually, I looked at 1791 Three Mile Dr. Nice property. There is some yard there, but yes it is a bit limited. The home had a nice feel, but is really large. I guess these homes built in the 1980’s are grandfathered in for using wood in the fireplace? Anyways, maybe the price will come down over time.

  29. bob c

    it seems the bank owned properties are the only
    ones ‘priced right’

    i’m following galena forest, saddlehorn and
    adjacent areas and the bank owned properties
    are by far the lowest priced
    (i haven’t seen the properties), but it seems
    the bank wants a buyer
    (i’m looking at 400k range)—theres even bank
    owned ‘cottage’ in montreux for 499

    private equity homeowners seem like a waste of time and the 50% bank owned rate of sales last month confirms my observations (short sales are
    okay, too because the seller is not in denial)

    just doing my homework for 2-6 months out when
    i move up there

    hope you find a fair deal—it seems they are still out there

  30. WorriedGuy

    Another point on Three Mile Dr. Even if you picked up the property at $400K, you will be looking at a $7K per year property tax. Again, good luck getting that reassessed. Ain’t going to happen anytime soon.

  31. Reno Ignoramus

    The people who are asking $400K have not yet discovered that they are now in the upper 8% of the market. They still think they are ‘moderately priced’ because they think the upper end is $750K. They don’t understand that the $750K market essentially does not exist, except in the still delusional minds of the people asking those prices.
    Part of this is understandable in that the media never provides priceband info. Only this blog does that. The RGJ reports that sales are up YoY and the delusional take this as good news. The fact that 92% of all sales are under $400K, and that 84% are under $300K never gets reported in the media.

  32. bob c

    i’m agreeing with you guys

    400K gets you into the best neighborhoods
    these days

    and the property taxes in nevada are ‘attached’
    to the property and thus a huge consideration

    when you buy the property, you get the existing
    property tax basis….it is not re-assessed based
    on the new selling price (as it is here in CA)

    anything built during the mania (2001-2007)
    is going to have an outrageous property tax basis

    things built in mid 90’s carry a reasonable
    property tax basis—older properties are
    a case by case

    1.the banks know the value and want to move property
    2.short sellers are at least past denial and might
    be realistic to current market conditions
    3. private equity owners for the most part
    are living in the past

    in a macro sense……are we headed into a
    nation wide depression with cheap real estate….
    i can’t answer that. but if the U.S. is going
    to survive this recession in a reasonable
    fashion; its a good time to buy (in my opinion)

    correct me if i’m wrong

    bob

  33. WorriedGuy

    Nice how the NV legislature capped in those rates at the peak near 2005. Now those falling RE values still lock in higher property taxes. However, I guess they didn’t figure people would walk from their homes. Ooops.

  34. Martin

    It depends what you buy bob c. If you buy a Smithridge condo for $45K, then I would say there’s not a lot of room for major further downside. But you buy in the $400s, I would say there is significant room for further drops. If only half of the people who are listed at $400K and above are serious, really serious about selling, then they are going to have to lower their asking price. Only 8 out of every 100 sales now are for more than $400K. Those are not very good odds for a serious seller.

  35. CommercialLender

    If’ll you’ll permit macabre humor….

    Montage’s lender, CORUS, had been declared brain dead this afternoon and is currently being harvested for its organs. MB Financial of Chicago took over more than a $1B in deposits and branches today, while the FDIC is hastily preparing other parts-sales to other bidders. Rumors have swirled in recent 24 hours that Steven Ross and partners (Related Cos. – $$$$ sized CRE player) were approved as a “bank” ostensibly to take over a part or the remaining CORUS assets…….

  36. Downtownjunkie

    6375 Wetzel in Montreux:

    $650/month HOA
    $575/ month Property Taxes
    1707SF 2br/2ba for $499,900
    $4k/month…

    Starting to make me giggle a little. I expect this to be the most expensive 2 br house in Nevada!

  37. bob c

    hoa and taxes are a killer —they better relist
    at 299

  38. WorriedGuy

    Houses are like printers…the printers get cheaper and cheaper, but the cartridges (HOA’s and Prop Taxes) add to a lot of more money over time.

  39. johnny

    How can a builder outright reject a CASH offer of 160k when they are listing at 173k?

    obviously this market still has a way to go before people become realistic.

  40. Downtownjunkie

    Even at 299k you are looking at 3300/month because of those pesky hoa and prop fees. The house would have to appreciate about 10% per year to cover that money pit.

    Everyone in Montreux is delusional but I see some homes just taken over that will be priced WAY lower when they come on.

  41. bob c

    thats why i will scower galena forest and saddlehorn (no hoa–probable favorable tax basis) and blow off montreux
    and arrowcreek

    who wants a home too ritzy to live in anyway–
    a cabin in the woods or a nice home with an acre

    wolf run or sierra sage golf over those
    stuffy country clubs anyday

  42. WorriedGuy

    Might want to remove Caughlin Ranch and Southwest Reno also. Prop taxes are a nightmare in that district. Saddlehorn-Fieldcreek are good, but the price of the homes are a bit up there at over $150 per sq. ft.

  43. Downtownjunkie

    I don’t need a big house-don’t want an acre. I like Montreux because of the maintenance free deal in the cottages and I LOVE to golf. I don’t even really care about the HOA. But to list a 2br home nowadays for $300/SF is ludicrous. The taxes are comical too.

  44. bob c

    worried guy we are on the same page

    saddlehorn-fieldcreek-galena forest it is 🙂
    location, location, location is worth $$$/sf

    junkie: what courses are the least crowded and
    most laid back (in your opinion) to look into
    a membership? i love to golf also—-often on
    a moments notice

  45. downtownjunkie

    I usually play weekdays (at a moments after lunch so my opinion may be not applicable if you schedule is different.

    Lakeridge fits into your description fairly well. I think a year membership/unlimited play is only $3-3,500. The course is nice and I often prefer it over Wolf Run and Arrowcreek (the other courses I frequently play). You usually don’t need to set up a tee time at Lakeridge. It is more crowded on Mondays and Fridays due to tourneys/events/large group plays.

    Wolf Run would be my next choice but it’s often windy in the afternoon -same as Arrowcreek.

    I agree with your opinion on the Montreux lifestyle. I think I will look at Fieldcreek/GF/Saddle.

  46. john

    give me a break you both have a handicap of 7000

    trust me, play miniature golf.

  47. FutureRenoHomebuyer

    Does anyone know a place where one can get good estimates for property taxes for a given property? I have long generally assumed that, in general, an older place will have lower taxes.

    After reading this discussion, though, it does seem to be quite a significant issue, with a great deal of variance for different neighborhoods.

    Also, do those higher property taxes result in better funded schools?

    Any help, info appreciated.

  48. Mike McGonagle

    FRH, start at he Assessor’s web site http://www.co.washoe.nv.us/assessor. Clink on Assessment Data – Real Property, click through the disclaimer, then search for the property by address, APN, or owner’s name. Then click on “Click here for the tax information from the Treasurer’s Office”. Click on the “Tax Assessments” tab. Your new tax bill will be the sum of the “Gross” numbers. The “Credits” are abatements to keep the actual tax bill from increasing over the cap rate. The credits disappear for a new owner.

    I believe the schools are funded on a per pupil basis, so higher taxes in a district do not equate to higher funding for schools in that district.

  49. Sully

    FRH; there is only one school district here – Washoe County. All funds go through it, so its highly unlikely one school will be better funded than another.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *